Podcasts about Dred

After being closed for renovations since 2020, the historic Old Courthouse in downtown St. Louis will reopen to the public on Saturday. It's the final phase of a $380 million decade-long project to enhance the Gateway Arch National Park grounds. The Old Courthouse is famous as the site where Dred and Harriet Scott sued for their freedom in the mid-1800s, a case that ultimately reached the U.S. Supreme Court where slavery was upheld. Jeremy Sweat, superintendent of the Gateway Arch National Park, and Ryan McClure, executive director of the Gateway Arch Park Foundation, join the show — in addition to Lynne Jackson, the great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott, and artist Cbabi Bayoc.

Chris and Amy talk with Ryan McClure, Executive Director of the Gateway Arch Park Foundation, about the renovation of St. Louis' historic Old Courthouse, reopening on May 3. They discuss key upgrades, including accessibility improvements, a new exhibit wing dedicated to Dred and Harriet Scott, and the courthouse's role in national history. Plus, a look at the reopening celebration, expected tourism impact, and the latest on DOGE cuts.

The Judge… Jury and Executioner of Pro Wrestling has been a dominating force on the deathmatch scene ever stepping through those ropes. He's gone up against some of the best from Hoodfoot, Masada, Madman Pondo and had an epic feud in CZW with Mickie Knuckles that culminated in an intense Cage of Death. Sit back and enjoy as we go over it all.Be sure to follow Judge Joe Dred on social media at….Facebook: Judge Joe DredInstagram: judgejoedred X(twitter): judgejoedredTikTok: judgejoedredBe sure to follow Drinkin at MO's on our social media accounts to stay up to date on the show..X(Twitter): Big_Mo83Instagram: drinkinatmosFacebook: Drinkin at MO's Threads: drinkinatmos Be sure to subscribe to the channel here on YouTube and all audio platforms…YouTube: https://youtube.com/@drinkinatmos338Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6PqYhq9pQF21c5Hu01b23j?si=X8XLCOFZS_-qGBBzdYoD7AApple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/drinkin-at-mos/id1617536259IHeartRadio: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-drinkin-at-mos-112523315?cmp=ios_share&sc=ios_social_share&pr=false&autoplay=trueAmazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/5af99e6b-2c35-4f31-b8e4-5d8183216231/drinkin-at-mo%E2%80%99s?ref=dm_sh_pMALI1SeXwefTlaUdVRC9VIohSpotify for Podcasters: https://anchor.fm/drinkinatmosThank you to Prince Nana Coffee for sponsoring the podcast. Use the referral link below to order yourself some amazing premium coffee.Referral: https://princenanacoffee.com/?ref=BigMoThank you to Reaper Apparel for having Drinkin At MO's as a Brand Ambassador… be sure to use the code below for 10% off your order..https://www.reaperapparelco.com/discount/Drinkin?ref=ApFLTTMUPromo code:Drinkinatmos #prowrestling #independentwrestling #wwe #aew #ringofhonor #TNAwrestling #gcw #czw #ecw #letsfngo #drinkinatmos #njpw #nwa #flophousewrestling #socalprowrestling #luchaunderground #luchaundergroundtemple #pwrevolver #warriorwrestling #fantasticleagueofwrestling

Atlas Shrugged seems to be everywhere today. Randian villains are in the news. Rand remains influential on the right, from the Reagan era to the modern libertarian movement. Perhaps most significantly, entrepreneurs like Elon Musk and Marc Andreessen who are moving into government with DOGE, have been influenced by Rand, and, fascinatingly, Andreessen only read the novel four years ago. Hollis Robbins (@Anecdotal) and I talked about how Atlas Shrugged is in conversation with the great novels of the past, Rand's greats skills of plotting, drama, and character, and what makes Atlas Shrugged a serious novel, not just a vehicle for ideology. Love it or loathe it, Atlas Shrugged is having a moment. Everyone brings a preconception of Ayn Rand, but she has been opposed by the right and the left ever since she first published. Other than Jennifer Burns' biography, academic study has largely declined to notice Rand. But Rand deserves our serious attention, both as a novelist, and as an influence on the modern world. Here are a couple of excerpts.We talk a lot these days about, “how can I be my best self?” That's what Rand is saying. She's saying, actually, it's not about earning money, it's not about being rich. It is about the perfection of the moral life. It's about the pursuit of excellence. It's about the cultivation of virtue. These are the important things. This is what Dagny is doing. When all the entrepreneurs at the end, they're in the happy valley, actually, between them, they have not that much money, right?Also this.What would Ayn Rand think about the influencer economy? Oh, she'd despise it. She would despise it… all these little girls wanting to grow up to be influencers, they're caught in some algorithm, which is awful. Why would you want to spend your life influencing others? Go create something. It's a hard medicine.And.Her aesthetic is very classical, draped. She doesn't wear flowery patterns. She wears draped, clearly close-fitting gowns and gray tailored suits and a minimum of jewelry, though she does have this bracelet chain made of Rearden metal. You don't know when she possibly has time to go shopping, but she's perfectly dressed all the time in the fashion that we would understand as feminist. She wears trousers, she wears suits, but when she goes out, this black velvet cape. I think it's important to see her as that, even though nobody talks about that in terms of this novel, what a heroine she is. I know that when I was reading her as a teenage girl, that's it.TranscriptHenry: Today, I am talking with Hollis Robbins, former dean of the humanities at Utah University and special advisor on the humanities and AI. We are talking about Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. Hollis, hello.Hollis Robbins: Hello. I'm really glad to have this conversation with you. We've known each other for some years and follow each other's work. I was trained as a scholar of 19th-century American, Victorian, and African-American literature, mostly novels, and love having conversations with you about big, deep novels. When I suggested that we read this book, I was hoping you would be enthusiastic about it, so I'm really happy to be having this conversation. It's hard to know who's interviewing you or what conversation this is, but for you coming at this middle-aged. Not quite middle-aged, what are you?Henry: I'm middle enough. No. This is not going to be an interview as such. We are going to have a conversation about Atlas Shrugged, and we're going to, as you say, talk about it as a novel. It always gets talked about as an ideology. We are very interested in it as a novel and as two people who love the great novels of the 19th century. I've been excited to do this as well. I think that's why it's going to be good. Why don't we start with, why are we doing this?Hollis: I wanted to gesture to that. You are one of the leading public voices on the importance of reading literature and the importance of reading novels particularly, though I saw today, Matt Yglesias had a blog post about Middlemarch, which I think he just recently read. I can credit you with that, or us, or those of us who are telling people read the big novels.My life trajectory was that I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead before I read Dickens, before I read Jane Austen, before I read Harriet Beecher Stowe or Melville or the Brontës. For me, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead were foundational novels as novels. I wondered what it would be like to talk to somebody whose experience was flipped.Henry: Right, I'm 38 and I'd never read this book. I was coming at it partly having read all those other books, but partly for my whole life, people have said, "Oh, that's really a bad book. That's so badly written. That book is no good." The number one thing I can say to people is this book is fun.Hollis: It's really fun. I was going to say usually what I forget to do in talking about books is give the summary. I'm going to hold up my copy, which is my dog-eared copy from high school, which is hilarious. It's got the tiniest print, which I couldn't possibly read now. No underlining, which is interesting. I read this book before I understood that you were supposed to underline when you liked passages in the book.It was interesting to me. I'd probably read it five or six times in my youth and didn't underline anything. The story is--- You can help me fill in the blanks. For readers who haven't read it, there's this young woman, Dagny Taggart, who's the heiress of the Taggart Transcontinental Railroad fortune. She's a woman. This takes place in about, I think, the '40s, '50s. Her older brother, Jim Taggart, is CEO. She's COO, so she's the operations person. It is in some ways the story of her-- It's not quite a bildungsroman. This is the way I tell the story. It's the story of her coming to the realization of how the world works. There's many ways to come at this story. She has multiple boyfriends, which is excellent. Her first boyfriend, his name is Francisco d'Anconia. He's the head of d'Anconia Copper. He too is an heir of this longstanding copper fortune. Her second is a metals magnate, Hank Rearden, who invents this great metal, Rearden metal.Really, it's also the story of the decline of America, and the ways that, in this Randian universe, these villainous group of people who run the country are always taking and extracting from producers. As she's creating and building this great railroad and doing wonderful things and using Rearden metal to do it, something is pulling all the producers out of society, and she's like, "What is going on?"It turns out there's this person, John Galt, who is saying, "I don't like the way the country is run. I don't like this extractive philosophy. I am going to take all the producers and lure them voluntarily to a--" It's a hero's lair. It's not like a James Bond villain lair. It's a hero lair in Colorado called Galt's Gulch. He is John Galt. It ends up being a battle between who is right in a wrong world. Is it the ethical person, Dagny Taggart, who continues to strive and try to be a producer and hold on to her ethics in this corrupt world, or is it somebody saying, "To hell with this. I am going on strike. You guys come with me and let the world collapse." How's that for summary?Henry: No, I think that's great. I couldn't have done a better job. One thing that we can say is that the role of reason, of being a rational person, of making reason the sole arbiter of how you make choices, be they practical, ethical, financial, whatever, that's at the heart of the book, right?Hollis: That's the philosophy. We could go there in a second. I think the plot of the book is that she demonstrates this.Henry: What she has to learn, like what is the big lesson for Dagny, is at the beginning, she hasn't fully understood that the good guys use reason and the bad guys do not, as it were.Hollis: Right. I think that's right. I like thinking about this as a bildungsroman. You said that the book is fun. Her part of the book is fun, but not really fun. The fun part of the book, and you can tell me because every time you kept texting me, "Oh my God, Jim Taggart. Oh my God, Jim Taggart. Oh my God, Jim Taggart."--Henry: These guys are so awful. [laughs]Hollis: They're so awful. The fun parts of the book, the Rand villains are the government entities and the cabals of business leaders who she calls looters and second-handers who run the country and all they do is extract value. Marc Andreessen was on a podcast recently and was all about these Rand villains and these looters. I think, again, to get back to why are we doing this and why are we doing this now, Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged is in the air with the second Trump administration.Henry: Yes. In a way, we're doing this because the question is, is this the novel of the future? Right? What we're seeing is it's very influential on the right. Rand's ideas have long been a libertarian inspiration. Elon Musk's read her. You mentioned Andreessen, Peter Thiel, all these people. It goes back to the Reagan days. People in the Republican Party have been quoting Ayn Rand. Then more broadly, we see all these worries about social collapse today. What happens in the plot of Atlas Shrugged is that society does slowly collapse.Dagny has to realize it's because of these people who are not using their reason and they're nationalizing things and taking resource away from proficient entrepreneurs and stuff. It's all about infrastructure, energy, people doing exploitation in the name of the common good, ineffective political leaders, people covering up lies and misdemeanors, people being accepting of what is obviously criminal behavior because it's in the cause of the greater good. We have free speech, all these topics, energy production. We're seeing this in the headlines. When I was reading this book, I was like, "Oh my God, how did she know?"Hollis: How did she know?Henry: How did she know.Hollis: I think the bildungsroman aspect of this as a novel. It's hard to read it as a novel. I think it's hard. By the way, I have to really I applaud you for not, until you got almost to the end of the book, texting me about this person or that person, or how it's political. I admire you for looking at the book and coming to the book as an expert in novels.What she comes to terms with, and it's a real slowly-- It's not even scales falling from her eyes. She doesn't sit and say, "Oh my God, the world is corrupt." She just is like, "That person's corrupt. I'm not going to deal with them. That person's corrupt. I'm not going to deal with them." She just keeps going, but she doesn't ever accept with a fatalism that she's living in this world where every single person who's in charge is going to let her down.Henry: It's also interesting to me that she doesn't complain.Hollis: No.Henry: Now, that reminded me of I wrote about Margaret Thatcher in my book. She was another big one for however hard it was, however difficult it was, why would you complain? Let's just go to work. A lot of people found her difficult for that reason. When I was reading this, I was like, "Ayn Rand clearly has the same idea. You can nationalize every last inch of the economy. I'm going to get up and go to work and try and beat you. I'm not going to sit around and complain." It's a very stern attitude in a way. She's very strict with herself. I found the book to be-- I know Rand is very atheist, but a very Protestant book.Hollis: Yes, it really is.Henry: Intensely Protestant, yes.Hollis: That's a nice way to think about it. A certain kind of Protestant, a Weberian Protestant.Henry: Sure.Hollis: Not a Southern Baptist Protestant who believes in the absence of reason. I was thinking I was teaching in Mississippi years ago. I was teaching a course on Wordsworth and had to do a unit on Voltaire because you can't really understand Wordsworth unless you understand Voltaire. There was a woman in my class. She was a version of Presbyterian who doesn't believe in reason, believes that in the fall, man lost their reason.Therefore, she asked if she could be excused from class because I was talking about Voltaire and the importance of reason. She said, "This is against my religion. If you believe that man has reason, you are actually going about it wrong, so may I be excused?" Which in all the years I've had people ask for excuses to miss class, that was a memorable one.Henry: That's unique. [laughs]Hollis: It's interesting because, again, I should get back to the novel, the opposition from Rand is as strong on the religious right as it is on the left. In fact, very strong. When Atlas Shrugged came out, William F. Buckley famously had Whittaker Chambers write the review. He hated her. He despised her. He despised the fact that she put reason first.Henry: Yes. I think that's worth emphasizing that some people listening will think, "I'm Rand. These nasty ideas, she's on the right." She's been ideologically described in that way so many times. Deirdre McCloskey in the Literary Review has just in the most recent edition written an absolutely scathing article about Rand. That's libertarian opposition to Rand.McCloskey is saying Hayek is the real thing here and Rand would have hated everything that Hayek did. She got everything wrong. I think the opposition to her, as you say, it's on both sides. One thing that's interesting about this novel is that because she created her own philosophy, which people will have different views on how well that went, but there isn't anyone else like this. All the other people like this are her followers.Hollis: Exactly.Henry: She's outside of the other systems of thought in a way.Hollis: We should talk about Rand. I'm going to quote a little bit from this book on feminist interpretation of Ayn Rand. Let's talk a little bit, if we can, about Dagny as the heroine of a novel, or a hero, because one of the really interesting things about reading Rand at this moment is that she's got one pronoun, he, him, man. She is in this era where man means man and women. That there isn't men and women, he and she, and now it's he, she, and them. She is like, "There's one pronoun." Even she talks about the rights of man or man believes. She means everybody, but she only means man too. It's interesting.I was very much part of the first pronoun wars in the 1980s when women scholars were like, "He and she." Now we're thrown out the window with that binary. Again, we don't need to talk about pronouns, but it's really important to understanding Rand and reading this novel, how much she embraces men and the male pronoun, even while she is using it both ways, and even while her story is led by this woman. She's beautiful. She's beautiful in a very specific way. She's tall, she's slender, she's got great cheekbones, she's got great shoulders, she's got long legs.Her aesthetic is very classical, draped. She doesn't wear flowery patterns. She wears draped, clearly close-fitting gowns and gray tailored suits and a minimum of jewelry, though she does have this bracelet chain made of Rearden metal. You don't know when she possibly has time to go shopping, but she's perfectly dressed all the time in the fashion that we would understand as feminist. She wears trousers, she wears suits, but when she goes out, this black velvet cape. I think it's important to see her as that, even though nobody talks about that in terms of this novel, what a heroine she is. I know that when I was reading her as a teenage girl, that's it.Henry: I want to be Dagny.Hollis: I want to be Dagny. I want to have capes, right?Henry: There's a very important scene, it's not too much of a plot spoiler, where Hank Rearden has invented this new metal. It's very exciting because it's much more efficient and it's much stronger and you can build new bridges for the trains and everything. He makes a bracelet of his new metal. It's a new steel alloy, I think, and gives it to his wife. His wife basically doesn't care.She's not really interested in what it takes to earn the money, she just wants to have the money. You get the strong impression throughout the book that some of the people that Rand is most scathingly disapproving of are wives who don't work. None of those people come out well. When Dagny goes to a party at the Rearden house and she is romantically involved with Hank Rearden, she sees the bracelet.Hollis: She isn't then, right? Isn't she not then?Henry: No, but they have feelings for each otherHollis: Right. Reasonable feelings for each other.Henry: That's right, reasonable feelings, but they're not currently acting on those feelings. She sees the bracelet and she exchanges her, I think, diamonds-Hollis: Diamond bracelet.Henry: -for the Rearden metal bracelet with the wife. It's this wonderful moment where these two opposite ideals of womanhood that Rand is presenting. It's a great moment of heroism for Dagny because she is saying, "Who cares about glittering diamonds when you have a new steel alloy that can make this incredible bridge?" It sounds crazy, but this is 1957. Dagny is very much what you might call one of the new women.Hollis: Right.Henry: I think in some ways, Rand-- I don't like the phrase she's ahead of her time. I've read a lot of 1950s fiction. This is not the typical woman.Hollis: No, this is not Cheever. This is not a bored suburban housewife at a time when the way the '50s are taught, certainly in America, it's like women could work during the war, then they were suburban housewives, there was bored, there were key parties and all sorts of Cheever sorts of things. This is not that. I read this first. I was only 15 years after it was published, I think, in the '60s, early '70s reading it.This, to me, seemed perfectly normal and everything else seemed regressive and strange and whiny. There's a lot to be said for reading this novel first. I think if we can talk a little bit about these set pieces because I think for me reading it as a novel and hearing you talk about it as a novel, that novels, whether we're thinking about-- I want to see if you want to compare her to Dorothea or just to any other Victorian women novel that you can think of. That's the closest, right? Is there anybody that's closest to Dorothea from Middlemarch? Is that there are these set pieces. People think that Rand-- the idea is that she's not a great writer. She is a great writer. She started in Hollywood. Her first book, The Fountainhead, was made into a movie. She understands plotting and keeping the reader's attention. We go forward, we go backwards. There's her relationship with Francisco d'Anconia that we see her now, years after, then we have flashbacks to growing up and how they became lovers.There are big meeting set pieces where everybody's in the room, and we have all the backstories of the people in the room, what is going to happen. There are these big party scenes, as you say. For example, this big, glorious, glamorous party at the Rearden house, Francisco is there. Francisco and Hank Rearden get in a conversation, and she's like, "I want to go see what my old boyfriend is talking to the guy I like about."There are these moments where you're not supposed to come at the book that way in this serious philosophical way. Then later on when there's this wonderful scene where Francisco comes to see Dagny. This is much later. Hank and Dagny are lovers, so he has a key to her apartment. He walks in and everybody sees immediately what's going on. It's as good as any other farce moment of somebody hiding behind a curtain, right?Henry: Yes.Hollis: Everything is revealed all at once. She's very good at scenes like that.Henry: Yes, very good. She's very good at high drama. One of the phrases that kept coming back to me was that this book is a melodrama of ideas.Hollis: Yes.Henry: Right? It's not a novel of ideas as such, it's a melodrama of ideas. I think one thing that people who think she's a bad writer will say is it's melodrama, the characters are flat, the prose is not lyrical, all these different things. Whereas when I read it, I was like, "She's so good at melodrama." I feel like, in some ways, it does not feel like a 1950s novel because there's so much excitement about technology, so much feminism, just so many things that I do not associate--Maybe I'm being too English, but I don't read John Cheever, for example, and think, "Oh, he loves the train." Whereas this book is very, very exciting as a story about inventing a new kind of train that goes really fast," which sounds silly, but that's a really Dickensian theme, that's in Middlemarch. Actually, that's what Matt Yglesias was talking about in his excellent piece today. What does feel very 1950s is you've got the Hollywood influence. The dialogue, I think, is not always great, but it is often great.I often would read pages and think, "This would actually be really good in, not an A++ movie, but in a decent crime movie or something. This would be quite good dialogue." There's a comic book aesthetic to it in the way that the scenes play out. Just a lot of these '50s aesthetics actually are present in the book. I'm going to read one paragraph. It's from part one. I think we should read out loud a few bits to give people a sense.Hollis: Yes.Henry: This is when Dagny has built a new train line using grid and metal to make the bridge so that it can go over a valley. I think that's right. The train can do 100 miles an hour. It's this very, very exciting new development. It means that energy can be supplied to factories, and so it's a huge, big deal. This is when she's on the train going at 100 miles an hour and she just can't believe it's happening."Things streaked past a water tank, a tree, a shanty, a grain silo. They had a windshield wiper motion. They were rising, describing a curve, and dropping back. The telegraph wires ran a race with the train, rising and falling from pole to pole, in an even rhythm like the cardiograph record of a steady heartbeat written across the sky. She looked ahead at the haze that melted rail and distance, a haze that could rip apart at any moment to some shape of disaster.""She wondered why she felt safer than she had ever felt in a car behind the engine. Safer here where it seemed as if should an obstacle rise, her breast and the glass shield would be the first to smash against it. She smiled, grasping the answer. It was the security of being first with full sight and full knowledge of one's own course, not the blind sense of being pulled into the unknown by some unknown power ahead."That's not MFA prose or whatever, but it turns the pages. I think she's very good at relating we're on the train and it's going very fast to how Dagny is thinking through the philosophical conundrum that is basically going to drive the whole plot forwards. I was reminded again and again of what Virginia Woolf said about Walter Scott, where she compared Scott to Robert Louis Stevenson. She said that Stevenson had beautiful sentences and dapper little adjectives. It was all jeweled and carefully done. You could marvel over each sentence.She said, "Whereas Scott, it's just page after page and no sentence is beautiful," but she says, "He writes at the level of the page. He's not like Stevenson. He's not writing at the level of the sentence. You have to step into the world." You can say, 'Oh, that wasn't a very good sentence,' but my goodness, the pages keep turning and you're there in the world, right?Hollis: Exactly.Henry: I think she made a really important point there and we just undervalue that so much when we say, oh, so-and-so is not a good writer. What we mean is they're not a Robert Louis Stevenson, they're a Walter Scott. It's like, sure, but Walter Scott was great at what he did. Ayn Rand is in the Walter Scott inheritance in the sense that it's a romance, it's not strictly realistic novel. You have to step into the world. You can't spend your whole time going, "Was that a great sentence? Do I really agree with what she just--" It's like, no, you have to go into this utopian sci-fi universe and you have to keep turning the pages. You get caught up and you go, "Wow, this is this is working for me."Hollis: Let me push back on that-Henry: Yes, good.Hollis: -because I think that was a beautiful passage, one of my favorite passages in this book, which is hard to say because it's a really, really big book. It's a memorable passage because here she is in a place at this moment. She is questioning herself. Isn't she questioning why? Why do I feel safe? Then it strikes her. In this moment, all interior while all this stuff is happening. This whole Rearden metal train bridge set piece is one of the highlights of at least the first half of the book. You come away, even if we've had our entire life up to her, understanding her as a philosophical this woman. How is that different from Dorothea or from Elizabeth Bennet? Yes, Elizabeth Bennet, right?Henry: Oh, no, I agree. My point was purely about prose style, which was to say if you say, "Oh, she writes like a Walter Scott, not like a Robert Louis Stevenson," you're going to deny yourself seeing what you've just said, which is that actually, yes, she has the ability to write philosophical characters.Hollis: When I first read Pride and Prejudice, I read it through the lens of Rand. Now, clearly, these heroines had fewer choices. Dorothea marries Casaubon, I don't know how you pronounce it, because she thinks he's a Randian expert, somebody who's got this grand idea. She's like, "Whoa, I want to be part of this endeavor, the key to all mythologies." Then she's so let down. In the Randian sense, you can see why she would have wanted him.Henry: That's right. I think George Eliot would have strongly disagreed with Rand philosophically. The heroines, as you say, what they're doing in the novel is having to realize that there are social conventions I have to understand and there are things I have to learn how to do, but actually, the key to working all that out is more at the moral philosophical level. This is what happens to Dagny. I think it's on the next page from what I just read. There's another passage where it says that she's in the train and she's enjoying. It's working and she's thrilled that her train is working. She was trying not to think, but she couldn't help herself.She said, "Who made the train. Is it the brute force of muscle? Who can make all the dials and the levers? How is it possible that this thing has even been put together?" Then she starts thinking to herself, "We've got a government who's saying it's wrong to do this, you're taking resources, you're not doing it for the common good." She says, "How can they regard this as evil? How can they believe that this is ignoble to have created this incredible thing?"She says she wants to be able to toss the subject out of the window and let it get shattered somewhere along the track. She wants the thoughts to go past like the telegraph poles, but obviously, she can't. She has this moment of realization that this can't be wrong. This type of human accomplishment can't be against the common good. It can't be considered to be ignoble. I think that is like the Victorian heroines.To me, it was more like Fanny Price, which is that someone turns up into a relatively closed system of ideas and keeps their own counsel for a long time, and has to admit sometimes when they haven't got it right or whatever. Basically, in the end, they are vindicated on fairly straightforward grounds. Dagny comes to realize that, "I was right. I was using my reason. I was working hard. I was being productive. Yes, I was right about that." Fanny, it's more like a Christian insight into good behavior, but I felt the pattern was the same.Hollis: Sure. I'll also bring up Jane Eyre here, right?Henry: Yes.Hollis: Jane Eyre, her relationship, there's a lot to be said of both Mr. Darcy and Mr. Rochester with Hank Rearden because Hank Rearden has to come to his sense. He's married. He doesn't like his wife. He doesn't like this whole system that he's in. He wants to be with a woman that's a meeting of the mind, but he's got all this social convention he has to deal with. Rochester has to struggle, and of course, Bertha Mason has to die in that book. He ends up leaving his wife, but too late. If we're going to look at this novel as a novel, we can see that there are these moments that I think have some resonance. I know you don't seem to want to go to the Mr. Darcy part of it.Henry: No. I had also thought about Jane Eyre. My thought was that, obviously, other than being secular because Jane Eyre is very Christian, the difference is that Hank Rearden and Dagny basically agree that we can't conduct our relationship in a way that would be morally compromising to her. They go through this very difficult process of reasoning like, "How can we do this in a good way?"They're a little bit self-sacrificing about it because they don't want to upset the moral balance. Whereas Mr. Rochester, at least for the first part of the book, has an attitude that's more like, "Yes, but she's in the attic. Why does it matter if we get married?" He doesn't really see the problem of morally compromising Jane, and so Jane has to run away.Hollis: Right.Henry: One of the interesting things about Rand, what is different from like Austen and the Brontës and whatever, is that Dagny and Hank are not in opposition before they get together. They have actually this unusual thing in romance and literature, which is that they have a meeting of minds. What gets in the way is that the way their minds agree is contra mundum and the world has made this problem for them.Hollis: I think in a way, that's the central relationship in--Henry: Yes. That was how I read it, yes.Hollis: Yes. The fact as we think about what the complications are in reading this novel as a novel is that here is this great central romance and they've got obstacles. She's got an old boyfriend, he's married. They've got all these things that are classic obstacles to a love story. Rand understands that enough to build it, that that will keep a lot of readers' interest, but then it's like, "That's actually not the point of my book," which is how the second half or the last third of the novel just gets really wiggy." Again, spoiler alert, but Hank is blackmailed to be, as the society is collapsing, as things are collapsing--Henry: We should say that the government has taken over in a nationalizing program by this point.Hollis: Right, because as John Galt is pulling all the thought leaders and the industrialists and all the movers of the world into his lair, things are getting harder and harder and harder, things are getting nationalized. Some of these big meetings in Washington where these horrible people are deciding how to redistribute wealth, again, which is part of the reason somebody like Congressman Paul Ryan would give out copies of Atlas Shrugged to all of his staffers. He's like, "You've got to read this book because we can't go to Washington and be like this. The Trumpian idea is we've got to get rid of people who are covering up and not doing the right thing."They've blackmailed Hank Rearden into giving up Rearden Metal by saying, "We know you've been sleeping with Dagny Taggart." It's a very dramatic point. How is this going to go down?Henry: Right. I think that's interesting. What I loved about the way she handled that romance was that romance is clearly part of what she sees as important to a flourishing life. She has to constantly yoke it to this idea that reason is everything, so human passion has to be conducted on the basis that it's logically reasonable, but that it therefore becomes self-sacrificing. There is something really sad and a little bit tragic about Hank being blackmailed like that, right?Hollis: Yes. I have to say their first road trip together, it's like, "Let's just get out of here and go have a road trip and stay in hotels and have sex and it'll be awesome." That their road trip is like, "Let's go also see some abandoned factories and see what treasures we might find there." To turn this love road trip into also the plot twist that gets them closer to John Galt is a magnificent piece of plot.Henry: Yes. I loved that. I know you want to talk about the big John Galt speech later, but I'm going to quote one line because this all relates to what I think is one of the most central lines of the book. "The damned and the guiltiest among you are the men who had the capacity to know yet chose to blank out reality." A lot of the time, like in Brontë or whatever, there are characters like Rochester's like that. The center of their romance is that they will never do that to each other because that's what they believe philosophically, ethically. It's how they conduct themselves at business. It's how they expect other people to conduct themselves. They will never sacrifice that for each other.That for them is a really high form of love and it's what enables huge mutual respect. Again, it's one of those things I'm amazed-- I used to work in Westminster. I knew I was a bit of a libertarian. I knew lots of Rand adjacent or just very, very Randian people. I thought they were all insane, but that's because no one would ever say this. No one would ever say she took an idea like that and turned it into a huge romance across hundreds of pages. Who else has done that in the novel? I think that's great.Hollis: It really is hard. It really is a hard book. The thing that people say about the book, as you say, and the reason you hadn't read it up until now, is it's like, "Oh, yes, I toyed with Rand as a teenager and then I put that aside." I put away my childish things, right? That's what everybody says on the left, on the right. You have to think about it's actually really hard. My theory would be that people put it away because it's really, really hard, what she tried is hard. Whether she succeeded or not is also hard. As we were just, before we jumped on, talking about Rand's appearance on Johnny Carson, a full half hour segment of him taking her very seriously, this is a woman who clearly succeeded. I recently read Jennifer Burn's biography of her, which is great. Shout out to Jennifer.What I came away with is this is a woman who made her living as a writer, which is hard to do. That is a hard thing to do, is to make your living as a writer, as a woman in the time difference between 1942, The Fountainhead, which was huge, and 57, Atlas Shrugged. She was blogging, she had newsletters, she had a media operation that's really, really impressive. This whole package doesn't really get looked at, she as a novelist. Again, let me also say it was later on when I came to Harriet Beecher Stowe, who is another extraordinary woman novelist in America who wrote this groundbreaking book, which is filled--I particularly want to shout out to George Harris, the slave inventor who carried himself like a Rand hero as a minor character and escapes. His wife is Eliza, who famously runs across the ice flows in a brave Randian heroine escape to freedom where nobody's going to tell them what to do. These women who changed literature in many ways who have a really vexed relationship or a vexed place in academia. Certainly Stowe is studied.Some 20 years ago, I was at an event with the great Elaine Showalter, who was coming out with an anthology of American women writers. I was in the audience and I raised my hand, I said, "Where's Ayn Rand?" She was like, "Ha, ha, ha." Of course, what a question is that? There is no good reason that Ayn Rand should not be studied in academia. There is no good reason. These are influential novels that actually, as we've talked about here, can be talked about in the context of other novels.Henry: I think one relevant comparison is let's say you study English 19th-century literature on a course, a state-of-the-nation novel or the novel of ideas would be included as routine, I think very few people would say, "Oh, those novels are aesthetically excellent. We read them because they're beautifully written, and they're as fun as Dickens." No one's saying that. Some of them are good, some of them are not good. They're important because of what they are and the barrier to saying why Rand is important for what she is because, I think, people believe her ideas are evil, basically.One central idea is she thinks selfishness is good, but I think we've slightly dealt with the fact that Dagny and Hank actually aren't selfish some of the time, and that they are forced by their ethical system into not being selfish. The other thing that people say is that it's all free-market billionaire stuff, basically. I'm going to read out a passage from-- It's a speech by Francisco in the second part. It's a long speech, so I'm not going to read all eight pages. I'm going to read this speech because I think this theme that I'm about to read out, it's a motif, it's again and again and again.Hollis: Is this where he's speaking to Hank or to Dagny?Henry: I think when he's speaking to Dagny and he says this."Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he want. Money will not give him a code of values if he has evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose if he has evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent."The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him with his money replacing his judgment ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered, that no man may be smaller than his money."Hollis: That's a good--Henry: Right? It's a great paragraph. I feel like she says that in dozens of ways throughout the book, and she wants you to be very clear when you leave that this book is not a creed in the name of just make money and have free market capitalism so you can be rich. That paragraph and so many others, it's almost biblical in the way she writes it. She's really hammering the rhythms, and the tones, and the parallels. She's also, I think, trying to appropriate some of the way the Bible talks about money and turn it into her own secular pseudo-Aristotelian idea, right?Hollis: Yes.Henry: We talk a lot these days about, how can I be my best self? That's what Rand is saying. She's saying, actually, it's not about earning money, it's not about being rich. It is about the perfection of the moral life. It's about the pursuit of excellence. It's about the cultivation of virtue. These are the important things. This is what Dagny is doing. When all the entrepreneurs at the end, they're in the happy valley, actually, between them, they have not that much money, right?Hollis: Right.Henry: The book does not end in a rich utopia, it's important to say.Hollis: It's interesting. A couple of things. I want to get this back since we're still in the novel. Let me say when we get to Galt's great speech, which is bizarre. He says a similar thing that I'll bring in now. He says, "The mother who buys milk for her baby instead of a hat is not sacrificing because her values are feeding the baby. The woman who sacrifices the hat to feed her baby, but really wants the hat and is only feeding the baby out of duty is sacrificing." That's bad. She's saying get your values in order. Understand what it is you want and do that thing, but don't do it because somebody says you have to. She says this over and over in many ways, or the book says this.Henry: We should say, that example of the mother is incidental. The point she's always making is you must think this through for yourself, you must not do it because you've been told to do it.Hollis: Right, exactly. To get back to the love story aspects of the book because they don't sit and say they love each other, even all the great romances. It's not like, "I love you. I love you." It's straight to sex or looks and meetings of the minds. It's interesting. We should deal with the fact that from The Fountainhead and a little bit in this book, the sex is a little rapey. It's a difficult thing to talk about. It's certainly one of the reasons that feminists, women writers don't approve of her. In the book, it's consensual. Whatever one wants to think about the ways that people have sex, it is consensual in the book. Also in The Fountainhead.I'm sure I'll get hate mail for even saying that, but in her universe, that's where it is. What's interesting, Francisco as a character is so interesting. He's conflicted, he's charming, he's her first lover. He's utterly good in every way. He ends up without her. Hank is good. Hank goes through his struggles and learning curve about women prioritizing. If you don't like your wife, don't be married to your wife. It's like he goes through his own what are my values and how do I live them.I know you think that this is bizarre, but there's a lot of writing about the relationship of Hank and Francisco because they find themselves in the same room a lot. They happen to have both been Dagny's lovers or ex-lovers, and they really, really like each other. There's a way that that bonding-- Homosexuality does not exist in her novels, whatever, but that's a relationship of two people that really are hot for one another. There is a lot of writing. There are queer readings of Rand that make a lot of that relationship.Again, this isn't my particular lens of criticism, but I do see that the energy, which is why I asked you which speech you were reading because some of Francisco's best speeches are for Hank because he's trying to woo Hank to happy valley. Toward the end when they're all hanging out together in Galt's Gulch, there's clearly a relationship there.Henry: Oh, yes. No, once you pointed out to me, I was like, "That makes sense of so many passages." That's clearly there. What I don't understand is why she did that. I feel like, and this is quite an accomplishment because it's a big novel with a lot of moving parts, everything else is resolved both in terms of the plot, but also in terms of how it fits her philosophical idea. That, I think, is pretty much the only thing where you're left wondering, "Why was that in there? She hasn't made a point about it. They haven't done anything about it." This I don't understand. That's my query.Hollis: Getting ready to have this conversation, I spent a lot of time on some Reddit threads. I ran Atlas Shrugged Reddit threads where there's some fantastic conversations.Henry: Yes, there is.Hollis: One of them is about, how come Francisco didn't end up with anybody? That's just too bad. He's such a great character and he ends up alone. I would say he doesn't end up alone, he ends up with his boyfriend Hank, whatever that looks like. Two guys that believe in the same things, they can have whatever life they want. Go on.Henry: Are you saying that now that they're in the valley, they will be more free to pursue that relationship?Hollis: There's a lot of things that she has said about men's and women's bodies. She said in other places, "I don't think there'll ever be a woman president because why would a woman want to be president? What a woman really wants is a great man, and we can't have a president who's looking for a great man. She has to be a president." She's got a lot of lunacy about women. Whatever. I don't understand. Someplace I've read that she understands male homosexuality, but not female homosexuality. Again, I am not a Rand scholar. Having read and seen some of that in the ether, I see it in the book, and I can see how her novel would invite that analysis.I do want to say, let's spend a few seconds on some of the minor characters. There are some really wonderful minor characters. One of them is Cherryl Taggart, this shop girl that evil Jim Taggart meets one night in a rainstorm, and she's like, "Oh, you're so awesome," and they get married. It's like he's got all this praise for marrying the shop girl. It's a funny Eliza Doolittle situation because she is brought into this very wealthy society, which we have been told and we have been shown is corrupt, is evil, everybody's lying all the time, it's pretentious, Dagny hates it.Here's the Cherryl Taggart who's brought into this. In the beginning, she hates Dagny because she's told by everybody, "Hate Dagny, she's horrible." Then she comes to her own mini understanding of the corruption that we understand because Dagny's shown it in the novel, has shown it to us this entire time. She comes to it and she's like, "Oh my God," and she goes to Dagny. Dagny's so wonderful to her like, "Yes. You had to come to this on your own, I wasn't going to tell you, but you were 100% right." That's the end of her.Henry: Right. When she meets Taggart, there's this really interesting speech she has where she says, "I want to make something of myself and get somewhere." He's like, "What? What do you want to do?" Red flag. "What? Where?" She says, "I don't know, but people do things in this world. I've seen pictures of New York," and she's pointing at like the skyscrapers, right? Whatever. "I know that someone's built that. They didn't sit around and whine, but like the kitchen was filthy and the roof was leaking." She gets very emotional at this point. She says to him, "We were stinking poor and we didn't give a damn. I've dragged myself here, and I'm going to do something."Her story is very sad because she then gets mired in the corruption of Taggart's. He's basically bit lazy and a bit of a thief, and he will throw anyone under the bus for his own self-advancement. He is revealed to be a really sinister guy. I was absolutely hissing about him most of the time. Then, let's just do the plot spoiler and say what happens to Cherryl, right? Because it's important. When she has this realization and Taggart turns on her and reveals himself as this snake, and he's like, "Well, what did you expect, you idiot? This is the way the world is."Hollis: Oh, it's a horrible fight. It's the worst fight.Henry: Right? This is where the melodrama is so good. She goes running out into the streets, and it's the night and there are shadows. She's in the alleyway. Rand, I don't have the page marked, but it's like a noir film. She's so good at that atmosphere. Then it gets a little bit gothic as well. She's running through the street, and she's like, "I've got to go somewhere, anywhere. I'll work. I'll pick up trash. I'll work in a shop. I'll do anything. I've just got to get out of this."Hollis: Go work at the Panda Express. Henry: Yes. She's like, "I've got to get out of this system," because she's realized how morally corrupting it is. By this time, this is very late. Society is in a-- it's like Great Depression style economic collapse by this point. There really isn't a lot that she could do. She literally runs into a social worker and the social-- Rand makes this leering dramatic moment where the social worker reaches out to grab her and Cherryl thinks, "Oh, my God, I'm going to be taken prisoner in. I'm going back into the system," so she jumps off the bridge.This was the moment when I was like, I've had this lurking feeling about how Russian this novel is. At this point, I was like, "That could be a short story by Gogol," right? The way she set that up. That is very often the trap that a Gogol character or maybe a Dostoevsky character finds themselves in, right? That you suddenly see that the world is against you. Maybe you're crazy and paranoid. Maybe you're not. Depends which story we're reading. You run around trying to get out and you realize, "Oh, my God, I'm more trapped than I thought. Actually, maybe there is no way out." Cherryl does not get a lot of pages. She is, as you say, quite a minor character, but she illustrates the whole story so, so well, so dramatically.Hollis: Oh, wow.Henry: When it happens, you just, "Oh, Cherryl, oh, my goodness."Hollis: Thank you for reading that. Yes, you could tell from the very beginning that the seeds of what could have been a really good person were there. Thank you for reading that.Henry: When she died, I went back and I was like, "Oh, my God, I knew it."Hollis: How can you say Rand is a bad writer, right? That is careful, careful plotting, because she's just a shop girl in the rain. You've got this, the gun on the wall in that act. You know she's going to end up being good. Is she going to be rewarded for it? Let me just say, as an aside, I know we don't have time to talk about it here. My field, as I said, is 19th century African American novels, primarily now.This, usually, a woman, enslaved woman, the character who's like, "I can't deal with this," and jumps off a bridge and drowns herself is a fairly common and character. That is the only thing to do. One also sees Rand heroes. Stowe's Dred, for example, is very much, "I would rather live in the woods with a knife and then, be on the plantation and be a slave." When you think about, even the sort of into the 20th century, the Malcolm X figure, that, "I'm going to throw out all of this and be on my own," is very Randian, which I will also say very Byronic, too, Rand didn't invent this figure, but she put it front and center in these novels, and so when you think about how Atlas Shrugged could be brought into a curriculum in a network of other novels, how many of we've discussed so far, she's there, she's influenced by and continues to influence. Let's talk about your favorite minor character, the Wet Nurse.Henry: This is another great death scene.Hollis: Let's say who he is, so the government sends this young man to work at the Rearden Mills to keep an eye on Hank Rearden.Henry: Once they nationalize him, he's the bureaucrat reporting back, and Rearden calls him the Wet Nurse as an insult.Hollis: Right, and his job, he's the Communist Party person that's in every factory to make sure that everything is--Henry: That's right, he's the petty bureaucrat reporting back and making sure everyone's complying.Hollis: He's a young recent college graduate that, Hank, I think, early on, if it's possible even to find the Wet Nurse early scene, you could tell in the beginning, too, he's bright and sparkly right out of college, and this is, it seems like a good job for him. He's like, "Woohoo, I get to be here, and I get to be--" Yes, go ahead.Henry: What happens to him is, similarly to Cherryl, he has a conversion, but his conversion is not away from the corruption of the system he's been in, he is converted by what he sees in the Rearden plant, the hard work, the dedication, the idealism, the deep focus on making the metal, and he starts to see that if we don't make stuff, then all the other arguments downstream of that about how to appropriate, how to redistribute, whatever, are secondary, and so he becomes, he goes native, as it were. He becomes a Reardenite, and then at the end, when there's a crowd storming the place, and this crowd has been sent by the government, it's a fake thing to sort of--Hollis: Also, a very good scene, very dramatic.Henry: She's very good at mobs, very good at mobs, and they kill, they kill the Wet Nurse, they throw him over. He has a couple of speeches in dialogue with Rearden while he's dying, and he says--Hollis: You have to say, they throw him, they leave him on this pile of slag. He crawls up to the street where Rearden happens to be driving by, and car stops, and so that finding the Wet Nurse there and carrying him in his arms, yes.Henry: That's right, it's very dramatic, and then they have this dialogue, and he says, "I'd like to live, Mr. Rearden, God, how I'd like to, not because I'm dying, but because I've just discovered tonight what it means to be alive, and it's funny, do when I discovered it? In the office, when I stuck my neck out, when I told the bastards to go to hell, there's so many things I wish I'd known sooner, but it's no use crying over spilt milk," and then Rearden, he goes, "Listen, kid, said Rearden sternly, I want you to do me a favor." "Now, Mr. Rearden?" "Yes, now." "Of course, Mr. Rearden, if I can," and Rearden says, "You were willing to die to save my mills, will you try and live for me?"I think this is one of those great moments where, okay, maybe this isn't like George Eliot style dialogue, but you could put that straight in a movie, that would work really well, that would be great, right? I can hear Humphrey Bogart saying these things. It would work, wouldn't it?She knows that, and that's why she's doing that, she's got that technique. He's another minor character, and Rand is saying, the system is eating people up. We are setting people up for a spiritual destruction that then leads to physical destruction. This point, again, about it's not just about the material world. It's about your inner life and your own mind.I find it very moving.Hollis: These minor characters are fantastic. Then let's talk a little bit about Eddie Willers, because I think a lot about Eddie Willers. Eddie Willers, the childhood three, there were three young people, we keep going back to this childhood. We have Dagny, Francisco, because their parents were friends, and then Eddie Willers, who's like a neighborhood kid, right?Henry: He's down the street.Hollis: He lives down the street. He's like the neighborhood kid. I don't know about you. We had a neighborhood kid. There's always neighborhood kids, right? You end up spending time with this-- Eddie's just sort of always there. Then when they turn 15, 16, 17, and when there's clearly something going on between Dagny and Francisco, Eddie does take a step back, and he doesn't want to see.There's the class issues, the status issues aren't really-- they're present but not discussed by Rand. Here we have these two children heirs, and they don't say like, "You're not one of us, Eddie, because you're not an heir or an heiress." He's there, and he's got a pretty good position as Dagny's right-hand man in Taggart Transcontinental. We don't know where he went to college. We don't know what he does, but we know that he's super loyal, right?Then when she goes and takes a break for a bit, he steps in to be COO. James is like, "Eddie Willers, how can Eddie Willers be a COO?" She's like, "It's really going to be me, but he's going to be fine." We're not really supposed to identify with Eddie, but Eddie's there. Eddie has, all through the novel, all through the big old novel, Eddie eats lunch in the cafeteria. There's always this one guy he's having lunch with. This is, I don't know, like a Greek chorus thing, I don't quite know, but there's Eddie's conversations with this unknown person in the cafeteria give us a sense, maybe it's a narrator voice, like, "Meanwhile, this is going on in the world." We have these conversations. This guy he's having lunch with asks a lot of questions and starts asking a lot of personal questions about Dagny. Then we have to talk to-- I know we've gone for over an hour and 15 minutes, we've got to talk about Galt's Speech, right? When John Galt, toward the end, takes over the airwaves and gives this big three-hour speech, the big three-hour podcast as I tweeted the other day, Eddie is with Dagny.Henry: He's in the radio studio.Hollis: He's in the studio along with one of John Galt's former professors. We hear this voice. Rand says, or the narrator says, three people in the room recognize that voice. I don't know about you, did you guess that it was Galt before that moment that Eddie was having lunch with in the cafeteria?Henry: No, no, no, I didn't.Hollis: Okay, so you knew at that moment.Henry: That was when I was like, "Oh, Eddie was talking, right?" It took me a minute.Hollis: Okay, were you excited? Was that like a moment? Was that a big reveal?Henry: It was a reveal, but it made me-- Eddie's whole character puzzles me because, to me, he feels like a Watson.Hollis: Yes, that's nice, that's good.Henry: He's met Galt, who's been under their noses the whole time. He's been going through an almost Socratic method with Galt, right? If only he could have paid a little bit more attention, he would have realized what was going on. He doesn't, why is this guy so interested in Dagny, like all these things. Even after Galt's big speech, I don't think Eddie quite takes the lesson. He also comes to a more ambiguous but a bad end.Hollis: Eddie's been right there, the most loyal person. The Reddit threads on Eddie Willers, if anybody's interested, are really interesting.Henry: Yes, they are, they're so good.Hollis: Clearly, Eddie recognizes greatness, and he recognizes production, and he recognizes that Dagny is better than Jim. He recognizes Galt. They've been having these conversations for 12 years in the cafeteria. Every time he goes to the cafeteria, he's like, "Where's my friend, where's my friend?" When his friend disappears, but he also tells Galt a few things about Dagny that are personal and private. When everybody in the world, all the great people in the world, this is a big spoiler, go to Galt's Gulch at the end.Henry: He's not there.Hollis: He doesn't get to go. Is it because of the compromises he made along the way? Rand had the power to reward everybody. Hank's secretary gets to go, right?Henry: Yes.Hollis: She's gone throughout the whole thing.Henry: Eddie never thinks for himself. I think that's the-- He's a very, I think, maybe one of the more tragic victims of the whole thing because-- sorry. In a way, because, Cherryl and the Wet Nurse, they try and do the right thing and they end up dying. That's like a more normal tragedy in the sense that they made a mistake. At the moment of realization, they got toppled.Eddie, in a way, is more upsetting because he never makes a mistake and he never has a moment of realization. Rand is, I think this is maybe one of the cruelest parts of the book where she's almost saying, "This guy's never going to think for himself, and he hasn't got a hope." In a novel, if this was like a realistic novel, and she was saying, "Such is the cruelty of the world, what can we do for this person?" That would be one thing. In a novel that's like ending in a utopia or in a sort of utopia, it's one of the points where she's really harsh.Hollis: She's really harsh. I'd love to go and look at her notes at some point in time when I have an idle hour, which I won't, to say like, did she sit around? It's like, "What should I do with Eddie?" To have him die, probably, in the desert with a broken down Taggart transcontinental engine, screaming in terror and crying.Henry: Even at that stage, he can't think for himself and see that the system isn't worth supporting.Hollis: Right. He's just going to be a company man to the end.Henry: It's as cruel as those fables we tell children, like the grasshopper and the ants. He will freeze to death in the winter. There's nothing you can do about it. There are times when she gets really, really tough. I think is why people hate her.Hollis: We were talking about this, about Dickens and minor characters and coming to redemption and Dickens, except Jo. Jo and Jo All Alones, there are people who have redemption and die. Again, I don't know.Henry: There's Cherryl and the Wet Nurse are like Jo. They're tragic victims of the system. She's doing it to say, "Look how bad this is. Look how bad things are." To me, Eddie is more like Mr. Micawber. He's hopeless. It's a little bit comic. It's not a bad thing. Whereas Dickens, at the end, will just say, "Oh, screw the integrity of the plot and the morals. Let's just let Mr. Micawber-- let's find a way out for him." Everyone wants this guy to do well. Rand is like, "No, I'm sticking to my principles. He's dead in the desert, man. He's going to he's going to burn to death." He's like, "Wow, that's okay."Hollis: The funny thing is poor John Galt doesn't even care about him. John Galt has been a bad guy. John Galt is a complicated figure. Let's spend a bit on him.Henry: Before we do that, I actually want to do a very short segment contextualizing her in the 50s because then what you say about Galt will be against this background of what are some of the other ideas in the 50s, right?Hollis: Got it.Henry: I think sometimes the Galt stuff is held up as what's wrong with this novel. When you abstract it and just say it, maybe that's an easier case to make. I think once you understand that this is 1957, she's been writing the book for what, 12 years, I think, or 15 years, the Galt speech takes her 3 years to write, I think. This is, I think the most important label we can give the novel is it's a Cold War novel. She's Russian. What she's doing, in some ways, is saying to America, "This is what will happen to us if we adopt the system of our Cold War enemies." It's like, "This is animal farm, but in America with real people with trains and energy plants and industry, no pigs. This is real life." We've had books like that in our own time. The Mandibles by Lionel Shriver said, that book said, "If the 2008 crash had actually gone really badly wrong and society collapsed, how would it go?" I think that's what she's reacting to. The year before it was published, there was a sociology book called The Organization Man.Hollis: Oh, yes. William Whyte.Henry: A great book. Everyone should read that book. He is worrying, the whole book is basically him saying, "I've surveyed all these people in corporate America. They're losing the Protestant work ethic. They're losing the entrepreneurial spirit. They're losing their individual drive. Instead of wanting to make a name for themselves and invent something and do great things," he says, "they've all got this managerial spirit. All the young men coming from college, they're like, 'Everything's been done. We just need to manage it now.'" He's like, "America is collapsing." Yes, he thinks it's this awful. Obviously, that problem got solved.That, I think, that gives some sense of why, at that moment, is Ayn Rand writing the Galt speech? Because this is the background. We're in the Cold War, and there's this looming sense of the cold, dead hand of bureaucracy and managerialism is. Other people are saying, "Actually, this might be a serious problem."Hollis: I think that's right. Thank you for bringing up Whyte. I think there's so much in the background. There's so much that she's in conversation with. There's so much about this speech, so that when you ask somebody on the street-- Again, let me say this, make the comparison again to Uncle Tom's Cabin, people go through life feeling like they know Uncle Tom's Cabin, Simon Legree, Eliza Crossing the Ice, without having ever read it.Not to name drop a bit, but when I did my annotated Uncle Tom's Cabin, this big, huge book, and it got reviewed by John Updike in The New Yorker, and I was like, "This is freaking John Updike." He's like, "I never read it. I never read it." Henry Louis Gates and then whoever this young grad student was, Hollis Robbins, are writing this book, I guess I'll read it. It was interesting to me, when I talk about Uncle Tom's Cabin, "I've never read it," because it's a book you know about without reading. A lot of people know about Atlas Shrugged without having read it. I think Marc Andreessen said-- didn't he say on this podcast that he only recently read it?Henry: I was fascinated by this. He read it four years ago.Hollis: Right, during COVID.Henry: In the bibliography for the Techno-Optimist Manifesto, and I assumed he was one of those people, he was like you, he'd read it as a teenager, it had been informative. No, he came to it very recently. Something's happening with this book, right?Hollis: Huge things are happening, but the people who know about it, there's certain things that you know, you know it's long, you know that the sex is perhaps not what you would have wanted. You know that there's this big, really long thing called John Galt's Speech, and that it's like the whaling chapters in Moby-Dick. People read Moby-Dick, you're like, "Oh, yes, but I skipped all the chapters on cetology." That's the thing that you say, right? The thing that you say is like, "Yes, but I skipped all the John Galt's Speech." I was very interested when we were texting over the last month or so, what you would say when you got to John Galt's Speech. As on cue, one day, I get this text and it's like, "Oh, my God, this speech is really long." I'm like, "Yes, you are the perfect reader."Henry: I was like, "Hollis, this might be where I drop out of the book."Hollis: I'm like, "Yes, you and the world, okay?" This is why you're an excellent reader of this book, because it is a frigging slog. Just because I'm having eye issues these days, I had decided instead of rereading my copy, and I do have a newer copy than this tiny print thing, I decided to listen on audiobook. It was 62 hours or whatever, it was 45 hours, because I listen at 1.4. The speech is awesome listening to it. It, at 1.4, it's not quite 3 hours. It's really good. In the last few days, I was listening to it again, okay? I really wanted to understand somebody who's such a good plotter, and somebody who really understands how to keep people's interest, why are you doing this, Rand? Why are you doing this, Ms. Rand? I love the fact that she's always called Miss. Rand, because Miss., that is a term that we

Je parle de socialisation avec Krysta Letto, psychoéducatrice de formation et fondatrice de Cœur en tête.La socialisation, c'est un élan naturel vers l'autre. Une envie de connecter, de créer de la relation. Est-ce qu'actuellement, nous permettons à nos enfants d'évoluer dans un contexte favorisant une saine socialisation ? De quoi ont-ils besoin pour faire émerger ces habiletés sans se perdre en tant qu'êtres à part entière. Les relations, c'est complexe et nos petits font face à tous ces défis en trainant avec eux leur immaturité cérébrale. Ils ont besoin de nous comme traducteur.  Sujets abordés : Qu'est-ce que la socialisation naturelle ?L'importance d'un soi solide, aller vers l'autre sans se perdre. Le risque de l'orientation vers les pairs. L'importance de l'adulte mature et bienveillant.Les risques liés à l'utilisation des écrans dans le « développement » des compétences sociales.Que font les meilleurs systèmes scolaires du monde.Miser sur l'unicité et non la conformité.Pour découvrir l'invité(e) :Site webInstagram  Suggestions lecture :Jouer, grandir, s'épanouir. Dre Déborah MacNamaraHold on to your kids. Dr Gabor Maté et Dr Gordon NeufeldAutres épisodes en lien :                    Épisode 11 : L'approche développementale avec Sarah HamelÉpisode 14 : La parentalité d'aujourd'hui avec Krysta LettoÉpisode 15 : Le besoin de repos émotionnel Solo par Anne-Marie CasaultÉpisode 23 : La sensibilité chez l'enfant avec Krysta Letto Si vous avez apprécié cet épisode , abonnez-vous au podcast pour ne rien manquer et prenez un moment pour laisser un 5 étoiles ! Partagez sur les réseaux sociaux et venez me placoter sur instagram.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Ce sont des façons simples et très précieuses de soutenir ce que je fais ici. 

You know the world has gone mental when Pep Guardiola channels his inner Jose Mourinho! A 2-0 defeat to Liverpool sees the DRed go 9 points clear at the top with 13 games played. Who can stop the Slot Machine?! Plus, Ruben Amorim's Man United scored 4 goals for the first time since 2021. Happy days are truly here again. Till United realise they're United. But we enjoy it while it lasts. Nathan Gomes joins us to discuss all the action from the Manchester vs Merseyside clashes! Follow us on our social media! Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cornerflagpod/ Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/cornerflagpod/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CornerFlagPod/ Subscribe to us on Spotify, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your pods from and don't forget to give us a 5 star review! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ball Greezy Ft Lil Dred - Nice & Slow X Taliban (Devious Blend) by DJ Devious Remix

This week on Look Forward, Jay and Brad return to have a wrap up conversation on the Democratic National Convention, Trump trying to push anti-constitutional rhetoric on flag burning, RFK Jr suspends his campaign but is it too late, Kamala Harris introduces her idea of going after unrealized capital gains on the mega wealthy, Trump will host a Jan 6th awards gala at his property, Republican group tries to use Dred Scott case to push new version of birtherism, Brian Kemp maybe unwilling to help Trump cheat, Jack Smith is back, the disappointing political downfall of Cornel West, James Comey popped his head back up again for attention, RFK Jr vs Whale - the single nuttiest thing you've ever heard, and much more!StoriesHarris and Co. knock it out of the park at the DNCThe campaign has raised half a billion dollars in a monthNew conservative hot topic…flag burning?Historical contextRFK Jr. is a massive sellout; who knew?But he may have waited too long?Kamala Harris' plan to tax unrealized capital gainsJanuary 6 was awesome, actually, here's an awards galaThis may be the dumbest Republican example of birtherism yetBrian Kemp might be signaling something very worrying for TrumpworldJack Smith's appeal is now activeWhy is this clown still running, again? ---- Second clown-like storyLocal arsonist voices support for Fire DepartmentThis Week in StupidA Whale…A WHALE!!!!!?

Paul Monk joins Jason to discuss the antics of the Drak Pack, three teenagers trying to make up for the evil their ancestors did in those classic horror movies. And all apparently without any conspicuous level of intelligence.... Covers the episodes 'Color me Dredful' and 'Mind Your Manners, Dr Dred'.

This week, we review a dynamic album titled Breakin' Combs from artist Dred Scott, released in 1994. Dred not only handles rhyming duties but also the production, making him a literal one-man band. This was his only album ever released but his magnum opus remains a true underground classic. https://www.instagram.com/str8_the_clippa?igsh=cTBzNnFhenRkN3Nl&utm_source=qrhttps://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100086006336425&mibextid=LQQJ4dhttps://www.tiktok.com/@brandonhetzel996?_t=8lhJo9VYp2c&_r=1

"Briny wind, a constant reminder of one's place on Nexus."Vera Dred, a fearless yet weary monster hunter, plunges into the heart of darkness to confront a creature holding the key to her acceptance into the Court of Dred - a legendary group of monster hunters comprised of her estranged sisters. Staring: Toborah Otte SFX: Infinite Samples & Envato ElementsArtwork: dsgn.verseA Pangia Media production 

Dzisiaj rozmawiamy z najbardziej barwnym duetem polskiego kitesurfingu

Celebrating the epic love story of Dred and Harriet Scott this Black History and Valentine's Month!   Subscribe to our podcast and follow us on Twitter @MillennialEdit1 to be apart of the discussion!   Send your questions (#AskAMillennial) and comments to: millennialedition1@gmail.com   Also, grab your Millennial merchandise at:  https://shop.spreadshirt.com/MillennialEdition19/   Music: Five of a Kind, Destiny & Time

"Remember" is the theme of RootsTech 2024, a three-day global online and in-person family celebration conference happening February 29 through March 2, 2024, in Salt Lake City. Hosted by FamilySearch International, the event will also include a never-before-seen video featuring the late President M. Russell Ballard, acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, recorded before his death. This episode of the Church News podcast explores what to expect at this year's RootsTech convention and the theme "Remember" with Jen Allen, director of events at FamilySearch, and Jonathan Wing, RootsTech manager.  The Church News Podcast is a weekly podcast that invites listeners to make a journey of connection with members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints across the globe. Host Sarah Jane Weaver, reporter and executive editor for The Church News for a quarter-century, shares a unique view of the stories, events, and most important people who form this international faith. With each episode, listeners are asked to embark on a journey to learn from one another and ponder, “What do I know now?” because of the experience. Produced by KellieAnn Halvorsen.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

I flere land er vaksinedekningen mot de tidligere store folkesykdommene, som polio og meslinger, farlig lav (1). Mødredødeligheten i Storbritannia har steget markant de siste årene (2). Beleggsprosenten i engelske sykehussenger er nå høyere enn noen gang (3). En ny stor studie fra Sverige viser at kvinner som har hatt perinatal depresjon, har økt risiko for død, særlig det første året (4). Er det sammenheng mellom bruk av østrogen og demens (5)? Hvor farlig er bruk av gabapentinoider mot kols (6, 7)? I en nylig publisert register- og populasjonsbasert studie ses det nærmere på hvor vanlig det er at bruk av tiazider fører til hyponatremi (8). Uprovoserte generaliserte krampeanfall er overraskende vanlig, men hvor vanlig er det å få mer enn ett slikt anfall (9, 10)? Er det noen sammenheng mellom inntak av fruktjuice og vektoppgang (11)? En ny studie påviser sterk sammenheng mellom energidrikk og blant annet røyking, alkoholbruk, dårligere søvnkvalitet og dårligere skoleprestasjoner (12). Og kommer du som lege til å bli erstattet av en chatbot i fremtidens diagnostisering (13, 14)? Sjefredaktør Are Brean deler siste nytt fra andre vitenskapelige tidsskrifter. Se hele litteraturlista på tidsskriftet.no: https://tidsskriftet.no/2024/02/podkast/redaktorens-hjorne-60-vaksiner-pa-vippepunktet-modredodelighet-i-storbritannia-gabapentinoider Tilbakemeldinger kan sendes til stetoskopet@tidsskriftet.no. Stetoskopet produseres av Caroline Ulvin Johansson, Are Brean og Julie Didriksen ved Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening. Ansvarlig redaktør er Are Brean. Jingle og lydteknikk: Håkon Braaten / Moderne media Coverillustrasjon: Stephen Lee

On this episode, we talk with a member of the Rabid Empire, Dred Roberts. Dred talks about growing up, getting into pro wrestling, training and much more! VOC Nation takes you behind the scenes of your favorite moments in pro wrestling history. Notable show hosts include legendary pro wrestling journalist Bill Apter, former WWE/TNA star Shelly Martinez, former WWE and AWA broadcaster Ken Resnick, former WCW performer The Maestro, former TNA Impact talent Wes Brisco, Pro Wrestling Illustrated's Brady Hicks, independent pro wrestling and Fireball Run star Sassy Stephie, and more! Since 2010, VOC Nation has brought listeners into the minds of the biggest stars in pro wrestling and entertainment. Subscribe to the podcasts for free on most major directories, and visit vocnation.com for live programming. Subscribe to premium - only $3/mo - for commercial full commercial free audio and video episodes. Exclusive access to 50 years of Bill Apter's interview archives is available for a nominal charge. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode, we talk with a member of the Rabid Empire, Dred Roberts. Dred talks about growing up, getting into pro wrestling, training and much more! Subscribe to our podcast today! If you become the 1,000 subscriber on YouTube, you will be given a Bumps & Thumps T Shirt, come on the podcast as a guest, and a signed Minnesota's Golden Age of Wrestling from Vern Gagne to the Road Warriors by the author George Schire. You can follow Dred Roberts on the following social media platforms: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100088598121134 Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/dredroberts_dnr?fbclid=IwAR2L3H_UwFNkyYz6q-Q7Rg5IU5cXXczG3mQ-Rotun-pvZFZvtlELp41O_ek X:https://twitter.com/DNR_KC?fbclid=IwAR2FFZYEYVGQY1X036xwCHMTMf_uS1ZV0NFdJcGxPn9Rpm2I_liwiF-6GwM Help support the podcast! You can make contributions or purchase items at: Contribution: www.anchor.fm/brian-ferguson3 and click the support button Teespring Store: https://bumps-thumps-2.creator-spring.com/ PayPal: @bumpsnthumps You can follow Bumps & Thumps on the following social media platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnQG8G8GE0eTHmzIzTBnZ8Q Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/Brianferguson Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/BumpsThumps Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bumps_n_thumps/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/bumps_thumps If you would like to purchase Joyce's book My Ringside Seat To The AWA, you can order the book by messaging on Facebook or by email. Payment method is through PayPal. The book is $20 plus $6 shipping in the United States. If you are ordering outside the United States, please contact Joyce for shipping questions. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/joyce.paustian.9 Email: joyce.paustian@gmail.com PayPal: joyce.paustian@gmail.com Brad Drake Podcast information: Facebook: https://www.youtube.com/@BradDrakePN YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@BradDrakePN Website: https://www.braddrake.net/ Falls Count Anywhere podcast information: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/FALLScountAnywhereGorillazinc Twitter: https://twitter.com/CountAnywhere YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@friendzmedianetwork8200 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/brian-ferguson3/support

On this episode of Your Dose of Death podcast, Loren sits down with the Honorable Judge Joe Dred and his Attorney Steven Jury as they agreed to come on the podcast. We talk about their upcoming match at RPWs whiteout show against Nathan Mowery, we discuss Jury's relationships as an attorney with promotions and what that entails, we discuss Joe Dred's meteoric rise in the world of deathmatch wrestling. We discuss all this and more on this episode of Your Dose of Death podcast.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/hit-the-books-realistic-wwe-fantasy-booking/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

On this episode of Your Dose of Death podcast, Loren sits down with the Honorable Judge Joe Dred and his Attorney Steven Jury as they agreed to come on the podcast. We talk about their upcoming match at RPWs whiteout show against Nathan Mowery, we discuss Jury's relationships as an attorney with promotions and what that entails, we discuss Joe Dred's meteoric rise in the world of deathmatch wrestling. We discuss all this and more on this episode of Your Dose of Death podcast.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/your-dose-of-death/donations

Dane and David talk about the satire of Judge Dredd.  It takes a bit for David to figure it out but they get really excited about it by the end.    Next months book Hellboy Volumes 1 and 2

Lynne Jackson, she's the President & Founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation...and a descendent  of Dred and Harriet Scott joins Tom and Megan in studio discussing Dred Scott his connection to St. Louis and why a new monument in Calvary Cemetery. Photo Courtesy Lynne Jackson

Spooky Dust Podcast returns this Friday with the first of 3 Sepetmber shows! Our special guest is none other than Judge Joe Dred. Join us as we XPW, Ruthless Pro Wrestling, Terry Funk, the art of the promo, the straight edge lifestyle and of course toy collecting! We'll see you Friday at 9AM.

Bad Men Must Serve the Time for Crimes from Insurance Fraud to Murder After a multiple-count indictment against dozens of members of the Gangster Disciples five of them, Alonzo Walton, Kevin Clayton, Donald Glass, Antarious Caldwell, and Vancito Gumbs, appealed their convictions and sentences following a joint trial. Each raised several grounds for reversal contending they were overcharged and over-sentenced. Some argued that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act violated the Sixth Amendment because the jury failed to find that the conspiracy involved murder. In United States Of America v. Antarious Caldwell, a.k.a. Fat, a.k.a. Phat, Kevin Clayton, Alonzo Walton, a.k.a. Spike, Vancito Gumbs, Donald Glass, a.k.a. Smurf, a.k.a. Dred, No. 19-15024, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (August 16, 2023) the Eleventh Circuit Affirmed all but one sentence and all convictions. BACKGROUND The Gangster Disciples began as a loosely affiliated network of street gangs in Chicago but later became a hierarchical national criminal organization. Its hierarchy consisted of a "Chairman" and "national board" for the country. The "Chief Enforcer" managed a team of "Enforcers" who exacted punishments for violations of the gang's rules, such as the prohibition against cooperating with the police. Relevant Crimes The indictment charged an array of criminal activities including carjacking and insurance fraud, attempted robbery of Eric Wilder, murder Pretrial and Trial Proceedings The principal charge against all the defendants was count one, which charged that the defendants conspired to conduct and participate directly and indirectly in the conduct of the Gangster Disciples through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). DISCUSSION The Eleventh Circuit concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its pretrial and trial procedural decisions and that the district court also did not abuse its discretion when it declined to ask questions during voir dire about unconscious bias. The District Court Did Not Impermissibly Depart from Neutrality When It Questioned a Witness. The trial judge is more than a referee to an adversarial proceeding. Consistent with the common-law tradition, the judge may comment on the evidence and question witnesses and elicit facts not yet adduced or clarify those previously presented. This questioning is limited only by the principle that a judge must maintain neutrality between the parties. The district judge stayed well within these bounds. He asked a single question without commenting on the veracity or relevance of the witness's testimony. The district court did not err, let alone clearly err, when it asked a witness for that information. Caldwell's Conviction Under the Armed Career Criminal Act and His Sentence Must Be Vacated. The Supreme Court recently held that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a "crime of violence" under section 924(c). 142 S.Ct. at 2020. So, the Eleventh Circuit must vacate Caldwell's conviction and it remand for the district court to re-sentence Caldwell for his remaining counts of conviction. All the other convictions and sentences were affirmed. ZALMA OPINION Insurance fraud is a serious crime. It is not as serious as murder. But when a group of men work together to commit murder and insurance fraud they are acting beyond reason and deserve as serious a sentence as the court can provide in accordance with the law. The appeal was their right and the Eleventh Circuit had the obligation and right to disavow them of their arguments and only changed a sentence because of a change in the law. (c) 2023 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support

Good Afternoon Nashville! Another week means another episode from your favorite guys in the podcast industry … we are The Black Men Vent Too Podcast! Pop those earbuds in, grab a glass of lemonade

Dred Scott v. Sandford is one of the most infamous cases in Supreme Court history: in 1857, an enslaved person named Dred Scott filed a suit for his freedom and lost. In his decision, Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney wrote that Black men “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.” One Civil War and more than a century later, the Taneys and the Scotts reunite at a Hilton in Missouri to figure out what reconciliation looks like in the 21st century. Voices in the episode include: • Lynne Jackson — great-great-granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott, and president and founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation • Dred Scott Madison — great-great-grandson of Dred Scott • Barbara McGregory — great-great-granddaughter of Dred Scott • Charlie Taney — great-great-grandnephew of Roger Brooke Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who wrote the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision • Richard Josey — Manager of Programs at the Minnesota Historical Society Learn more: • 1857: Dred Scott v. Sandford • The Dred Scott Heritage Foundation   Special thanks to Kate Taney Billingsley, whose play, "A Man of His Time," inspired the episode; and to Soren Shade for production help. Additional music for this episode by Gyan Riley. Shadow dockets, term limits, amicus briefs — what puzzles you about the Supreme Court? What stories are you curious about? We want to answer your questions in our next season. Click here to leave us a voice memo. Supreme Court archival audio comes from Oyez®, a free law project by Justia and the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School. Support for More Perfect is provided in part by The Smart Family Fund. Follow us on Instagram, Threads and Facebook @moreperfectpodcast, and Twitter @moreperfect.

Banjo Music courtesy of Banjo HangOut Waiting for The Robert E. Lee.Yes, Seri Can Get It Wrong Again, A cogent list requires discernment Fault Number Four for spotting AI in news writing:When AI compiles a list it will include redundancies & conflicting statements.Seen on Today (Channel Four Nashville) more evidence of AI's basic flaws —A story about Summer Savings in the fuel department — I find these two items on the list:Use a credit card to accumulate rewards points,Pay Cash,Buy regular gas, Of course, the “human” host created the caveat. (Buy premium if your car requires it)Here's Seri's problem — Seri was tasked to make a list, she was not asked to eschew conflicting statements — that's a human attribute.

Weiter gehts mit zauberhafter Romantik! Dazu Werwölfe, Fledermäuse und HUAN! Wie toll ist denn bitte dieser wunderbare Hund?Hier findet ihr Eriks Musik: https://lindimaitarerik.bandcamp.com/Viel Spaß mit der neuen Folge!Tolkühnes Merch!https://shop.spreadshirt.at/tollkuehn-podcast/Instagram @tollkuehn_podcastSchaut auf unserem Discord Server vorbei:https://discord.gg/hobbithoehleFalls du uns über Steady unterstützen willst:https://steadyhq.com/de/tollkuehn-podcasthttps://ko-fi.com/tollkuehnMusik: How it Began - Silent Partner Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/tollkuehn. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Cliff and Isaac join Jesse Olsavsky, author of The Most Absolute Abolition: Runaways, Vigilance Committees, and the Rise of Revolutionary Abolitionism, 1835–1861, for a discussion on his book on the early abolitionist movement. They discuss the textbook history of abolition, and how this masks the role of runaways and other radicals substituting them for a white middle-class leadership, what Vigilance Committees were and how they acted, the exchange of ideas between different social groups in the abolitionist movement, the role runaway interviews had on the movement and its parallels today. They also talk about the Fugitive Slave Act and its effect on the Committees, the international dimension of abolitionism, the abolitionist view of the U.S. republic and the links between abolitionism and other movements. Prof. Olsavsky recommended these texts as good primary sources on revolutionary abolitionism. Thomas Smallwood (https://docsouth.unc.edu/neh/smallwood/smallwood.html) Harriet Jacobs (https://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/jacobs/jacobs.html) Phillip Foner's edited collection of speeches by Frederick Douglass (https://archive.org/details/DouglassSelectionsWritings) Frances Ellen Walker's poems (https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/frances-ellen-watkins-harper) Martin Delany's novel Blake (https://archive.org/details/blakeorhutsofame00dela) Harriet Beecher Stowe's second novel Dred (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/55012)

Danti Dan play by Livin Dred - Inishowen Traditional Orchestra & Choir - Gina Lollabrigida RIP - Doolin Hedge School

Make sure to join us for this awesome broadcast classic where Bob Enyart interviews Jonathan Cahn on the end times, AND for the first 10 minutes of our Bob Enyart End Times seminar. To get the entire seminar, click here! * About this Interview and on this Page: We a'e eagerly looking forward to the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but that should not make us vulnerable to fake news, even Christian fake news, and confused Bible teaching... - Rejecting The Harbinger's Claim of Divine Signs (far below) - Leading End Times Preachers All Dyin' of Old Age (just below) - List of the Erroneous Calculated Dates - Last Days vs. Last Minutes - The Timing of Christ's Return has Changed And related BEL Resources: - Debunking the Blood Moon Claims with a Creationist Astronomer - Bob Schedules Meet with End Times Preacher 9/24/17 (after predicted rapture) - BEL Y2K Survival Kit Cuts Power to House (so our wives don't think that were nuts) - Two Decades After 9/11 End Times Predictions Still Pending - Bob Enyart's End Times Seminar filmed four days after 9/11 to a live and "still here" audience!* 2016 Update: If Christian brother Jonathan Cahn would have paid closer attention to Bob's comments in this interview, and had taken this written show summary to heart, he could have averted the embarrassment of his failed prophecy of economic collapse for 2015. Further, at rsr.org/blood-moons#rsr-vs-the-apocalypse-gurus we make our argument that while the predictions of the End Times gurus are systematically wrong, here at Bob Enyart Live and RSR our biblically-based general and science predictions have an uncanny way of being confirmed!  This is a Special Edition of Real Science Radio. * LIST OF LEADING END TIMES PREACHERS * Leading End Times Preachers All Dyin' of Old Age:  The modern end-times movement really took off way back in the 1970s and 1980s. Did all the big-name end times teachers think that they would still be preaching in their 70s, 80s, and 90s, and as a group dying of old age? No, of course not. We discuss this in a series on BEL beginning on May 14th, 2018 for the 70th anniversary of the modern State of Israel. See specifically the program, How to turn perfectly good Scripture into bad predictions. We love these guys, and Bob personally (and literally) sat at the feet of Chuck Smith and Chuch Missler for scores of Bible studies. But clearly, their dying of old age indicates that they got something very wrong in their interpretation of the headlines and the Scriptures...   - Tim LaHaye (90, 1926 - 2016, Left Behind Series) - Chuck Smith (86, 1927 - 2013, founder, Calvary Chapel) - Chuck Missler (83, 1934-2018, end times teacher) - Harold Camping (92, 1921-2013, founder, Family Radio) - Hal Lindsey (91, b. 1929, Late Great Planet Earth) - Noah Hutchings (92, 1922-2015, six decades on Southwest Radio Church) - Irvin Baxter (75, 1945-2020, Endtime Ministries) as described by B.E. - John Hagee (81, b. 1940; recent error: Blood Moons) - Jack Van Impe (88, 1931-2020; had celebrated his 60-year anniversary with Rexella; began in ministry in 1948 and as a preacher in 1952). See Enyart discuss all this with WND readers.  * 2020 Update: * List of the Erroneous Calculated Dates: Here's an example of the never-ending, and so far, universally incorrect, calculating of end times dates by a Christian author, and then another example by the leader of the Jehovah's Witnesses...   * Remember When -- The Dates & The Headlines: Countless Christians were told that the following dates were significant because they represented end-times markers. Thousands of news headlines were misinterpreted prophetically to arrive at these erroneous dates. Of course the Lord will return one day, and hopefully, soon. But confused teachers used events and dates like these to confuse others. - 1850 for the ascent of the Anti-Christ (calculated by London's protestant scholar Robert Fleming, V.D.M in 1701 by adding to 608 A.D. the "1260 days" of Revelation, converting each day to a year - 1948 the nation of Israel is reconstituted in the Middle East - 1957 European Common Market (ECM) established with six nations - 1973 The ECM added three more nations, prophecy teachers added this up to Daniel's "ten toes" - 1980 In the decade of the 80s, three more nations joined the ECM, still adding up to Daniel's ten toes - 1993 The European Union (EU) was formed with 12 nations - 1995 Ten Nation European Alliance (WEU) formed, claimed to be Daniel's 10-toed prophecy - 2001 Islamic terrorist attack on America, claimed to represent the end times - 2010 Ten Nation European WEU decides to disband claimed as major fulfillment of prophecy - 2011 Ten Nation WEU officially disbands and absorbed into the EU - 2016 The now 28-nation EU begins to unravel with the UK's Brexit and Italy's no-confidence vote- 2020 With the U.K. officially out, the EU is down to 27 nations.* Counting Backwards From 2020: It's been... 1,520 years since A.D. 500, the year when Irenaeus, et al, predicted that Jesus would return 1,220 years since A.D. 800, the year when Sextus Julius Africanus predicted Armageddon 1,020 years since A.D. 1000, the year when Pope Sylvester II, et al, predicted the beginning of the end 176 years since 1844 when the early 7th Day Adventists believed Christ would have returned 170 years since 1850 when Robert Fleming, writing in 1700 A.D., calculated the anti-Christ's reign 142 years since 1878 when Jehovah's Witnesses said would be the last year for the church on earth 116 years since 1914 when the Jehovah's Witnesses said it would be the end 99 years since 1921 when the JW's said millions now living will never die 84 years since 1936, the year when Herbert W. Armstrong predicted the end (updated to 1943, '72, '75) 72 years since 1948 when Israel became a nation again after World War II 63 years since 1957 when the European Common Market was Daniel's ten-nation alliance 39 years since 1981 when Chuck Smith, et al, taught the seven-year tribulation would begin 35 years since 1985, the year Lester Sumrall wrote about in his book, I Predict 1985 38 years since 1982, the year Pat Robertson predicted would be the end of the world  32 years since 1988 a generate after Israel became a nation with 88 reasons for the Rapture in '88 26 years since 1994, the year that Harold Camping predicted would start the great tribulation 23 years since 1997, the year that Bishop James Ussher predicted would be the end of the world20 years since 2000, when the Y2K bug was predicted to herald the end times, and when and Lester Sumrall predicted would be the end, and when Jerry Falwell predicted would see God's judgment. 19 years since 2001 when America was attacked on 9/11 13 years since 2007, the year Pat Robertson wrote in 1990 would be the end 6 years since 2014 when the blood moons were supposed to indicate the end times.* Last Days vs. Last Minutes: Many years ago my call screener put through to me someone who told him that the diseases in the world were evidence of the Last Days. The guy, Jim from Columbus, Ohio asked me, "Bob, where do you stand on the Ebola virus?" I answered, "I'm against it." Looking at the news events listed above, when they occurred popular prophecy teachers claimed they represented end times prophecies. Well, it's been a long time since. The "end times" is a lot longer than any of them would have predicted. As we say at Denver Bible Church to those misinterpreting last-days prophecies, "From now only, will you only tell us about the Last Minutes?" Afterall, the most famous end-times teachers are all dying of old age and these last-days interpretations have been around for more than half a century. * The Bible shows the Timing of Christ's Return has Changed: You can link directly to this section as kgov.com/second-coming-timing or kgov.com/second-coming-timing-has-changed. For most folks, before reading this list we recommend praying, "Lord, if Your Word clearly teaches something that I will tend to reject because it conflicts with some of my biases, please help me to be humble before You and willing to challenge my preexisting beliefs." - God Views the End Times Calendar as Changeable: "I, the LORD, will hasten it in its time" Isa. 60:22 - Believers Can Change the Time of Christ's Return: Peter wrote that believers too should set about, "hastening the coming of the day of God" 2 Pet. 3:12 - Even the Length of the Tribulation will Change: Jesus said that, "those days will be shortened" Mat. 24:22 - Like God Shortening His Punishment of Israel: the Old Testament precedents for God shortening the coming Tribulation, include, "choose... seven years... Or... three months... Or... three days' plague..." And David said... "His mercies are great..." So the Lord heeded the prayers for the land, and the plague was withdrawn from Israel. 2 Sam. 24:12-17, 25 - For God Promised Mercy Regardless of Prophecy If...: "The instant I speak concerning a nation [Israel], to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it." Jer. 18:7-8 (see also a dozen more Category 1 verses like that one, including the next, about Nineveh) - Again, Get This Down, God Promises Mercy Regardless of Prophecy If: "...forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown! [But then] they turned from their evil way; and God repented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it." Jonah 3:10 - Before You Get Through Israel's Villages: "...I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." Mat. 10:23 (yet this did not happen, because as warned, God changed His plan for Israel; Jer. 18:9-10; Rom. 11) - Some of You Won't Die Until: "there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." Mat. 16:28 (this didn't refer to the Transfiguration which occurred about a day later; see too Mark 9 and Luke 9; yet they all did die, because God changed His plan for Israel, and grafted in the Gentiles; Jer. 18:9-10; Rom. 11) - John Might Not Die Before: "Then this saying went out among the brethren that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but, 'If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you?'" John 21:23 - This Generation Won't Pass Until: "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place." Mat. 24:34  (yet that generation did pass away, because God changed His plan for Israel and instead grafted in the Gentiles; Jer. 18:9-10; Rom. 11) - Before Paul, Believers Sold their Homes: "all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles' feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need." Acts 4:34-35; 5:1-2 (this behavior, appropriate at the time, changed after Paul's Acts 9 conversion when God grafted in the Gentiles) - Christ's Soon Return Permeated His Teachings: "Sell what you have and give alms" Luke 12:33; "And everyone who has left houses... or lands, for My name's sake..." Mat. 19:29. "...do not worry about your life, what you will eat; nor about the body, what you will put on" Luke 12:22. The "ravens... neither sow nor reap" yet "God feeds them" Luke 12:24. "He commanded them to take nothing for the journey except a staff——no bag..." Mark 6:8. "Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your moneybelts..." Mat. 10:9. "Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and... come, follow Me" Luke 18:22. (yet He did not return soon, as He had warned that He may change His mind). And even that Jesus went about all Galilee preaching "the gospel of the kingdom" Mat. 4:23; 9:35; 24:14; Mark 1:14-15 and Jesus said, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe in the gospel [of the kingdom]" Mark 1:15; Mat. 3:2; 4:17 - With Homes Sold, They Became Poor: Remember that "all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them... and they distributed to each as anyone had need." Acts 4:34-35; 5:1-2 - It Was the Converts of the Twelve Who Fell into Poverty:  1 Cor. 16:1–4; 2 Cor. 8:1-9:15; Gal. 2:10; Rom. 15:25–31; Acts 11:27–30; 24:17 for communism quickly fails; the sale of pesonal property was to be a short-term tactic to survive the Tribulation and enter the Kingdom; the Postponement led to their poverty. - Paul's Converts Kept Their Homes and Provided Relief: (The "apostle to the Gentiles" was able to raise relief from his converts) 1 Cor. 16:1–4; 2 Cor. 8:1-9:15; Gal. 2:10; Rom. 15:25–31; Acts 11:27–30; 24:17 to support the believers in Judea who fell into poverty; they hadn't immediately become poor after selling their property, but after the delay in Christ's previously-expected soon return  - God Warned He may Not Give Israel their Kingdom as Prophesied: "And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it." Jer. 18:9-10 (see also Jer. 18:7-8; for God, unlike a juvenile judge, does not make empty threats) - One Year Probation Followed Three-Year Earthly Ministry: "'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree [figuratively, Israel] and find none. Cut it down...' But he answered and said, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'" Luke 13:7-9 - Daniel's Seventieth Week Suspended: The prophet Daniel's 490-year prophecy (Dan. 9:24-27) of 483 years between the command to rebuild Jerusalem (by Artaxerxes Neh. 2:1-8) until the execution of the Messiah, followed by the next seven years that were to be the Great Tribulation (Mat. 24:15; Mark 13:14); but Israel rejected their resurrected Messiah so as God had warned (Jer. 18:9-10) He changed what He had prophesied for them by postponing both the tribulation and the Kingdom it would usher in. - After the Cross Ten Signs of the Tribulation Were Evident: See chapter 9 of kgov.com/the-plot for details; in the year beginning with Christ's death the signs of the Great Tribulation that occurred included the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, signs and wonders, earthquakes, believers beaten by councils, the laying on of hands to imprison, arrests leading to occasion for testimony, martyrdom, expectation of an abbreviated end times and of the soon appearance of signs in the sun, moon, and stars, irresistible wisdom displayed. - Fulfillment of Prophetic Seven Feasts of Israel Suspended: God ceased the apparent fulfillment of the Feasts of Israel on their very calendar days, for Jesus died on the day the Jews killed the Passover lamb; He was in the tomb during Unleavened Bread; raised on Firstfruits; gave the Holy Spirit on Pentecost; and He "tabernacled" among us (John 1:14, with the Greek saying not "dwelt" but "tabernacled"), likely fulfilling that feast; but the remaining two feasts including Trumpets are yet awaiting fulfillment, as God postponed His prophetic plan for Israel.    - Jesus Hardly Spoke About the End Times Until Just Before the Cross: The apocalyptic Olivet Discourse happened when Jesus said to His disciples, "You know that after two days is the Passover, and the Son of Man will be delivered up to be crucified." Mat. 26:1-2 - God the Son Didn't Know the Timing: and neither did God the Holy Spirit but only the Father, for it is in His purview to decide when Jesus shall return. Just Google: open theism verses, and see Category 15, which includes the following: The Holy Spirit, third person of the Godhead, did not know something that the Father knew, namely, the planned day and hour of the Second Coming Mark 13:32 and of course that lack of knowledge did not negate His divinity for the quantitative attribute of omniscience is not like the absolute qualitative attributes; likewise, no man, no angel, nor even the Son knew, for "of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only" of the persons of the Godhead, with even the Second Person not knowing the timing of the Second Coming which was in the purview of the Father alone Mat. 24:36. - Israel's End Times Signs Not Relevant Today: When the Lord temporarily set aside Israel's Kingdom and their covenant of circumcision and grafted in the Body of Christ with its covenant of grace (this is not replacement theology), God's new sign, so to speak, of the end of the Body of Christ's time on earth is the "fullness of the Gentiles", whatever He means by that, be it a billion believers to populate heaven, or the Gospel preached worldwide, or holiness within the Body, etc.; so that, when "the fullness of the Gentiles has come in" then God will graft Israel back in again, "for God is able to graft them in again", and thereby resume the countdown on their end times calendar; Rom. 11:11-32. - To Read More about the Changed Date of the Second Coming: Click to get a copy of Bob Enyart's life's work, The Plot: An Overview of the Bible is the Key to its Details and review the list of 33 Categories of more than 500 scriptures at opentheism.org/verses. * Tonight on Denver's 7News: Bob Enyart said on 7News to Colorado's ABC audience that Christians who say that the death penalty is immoral are unwittingly accusing God the Father of being unjust, for He required a payment of death to pay for the sin of the world. We thank God for the opportunity to promote the principles of the Gospel on the nightly news! Please also see AmericanRTL.org/death-penalty.    Now Back to the Harbinger: * Enyart & Cahn Agree on the Theme of The Harbinger: Bob Enyart interviews Jonathan Cahn, the NY Times bestselling author of The Harbinger. Bob appreciates Cahn's warning to an America defiant of God but Enyart disagrees with Cahn's claim that 9/11 was a specific sign from God. See just below Bob's notes regarding his reasons for disagreeing with Jonathan Cahn's claims of a specific divine message in the events following the Attack on America.   * Rejecting The Harbinger's Claim of Divine Signs: (This is not meant to be harsh, for we love and appreciate Jonathan Cahn, and though airing a daily radio talk show, we don't want to be like David who became battle hardened; yet, this is meant to be direct.) The last nine minutes of audio on today's program were recorded twelve years ago at an End Times seminar conducted in Winona Lake, Indiana only four days after Sept. 11, 2001. Bob Enyart predicted that sincere Christian authors (who love and honor God and preach the Gospel) would find a Bible passage with a few uncanny similarities to 9/11, and so would claim that therefore Al Qaeda's attack on America was a sign from God. Consider Jonathan Cahn's few parallels (which get repeated often) from Isaiah 9:10 to 9/11 events. In the audio from September 2001, Bob Enyart illustrates how easy this is to claim fulfillment of a prophetic pattern when, compared to the Harbinger, he quoted more, and more significant, 9/11 parallels, not from Isaiah but from Revelation 17 and 18. As one small example, the greater parallel between Scripture and 9/11 is not a sycamore and a fir tree, but Washington DC and NYC debating the patent rights of murdered unborn children so that "the merchants of the earth" can buy and sell the "the bodies and souls of men." So Bob intentionally misinterpreted the Scriptures to show how easily (and even innocently) this is done, and while Cahn's parallels get to select from events over a period of years, Bob's many more prophetic parallels were all fulfilled on the very day of September 11th. Harbinger Expert Critic says: "Bob, I read your analysis this morning and it was dead right on every point." - David James, 3/24/13 The Internet hasn't existed for 2,700 years. Jonathan Cahn's nine harbingers are based on a quote in the Bible of men defiant against God, who, after suffering God's judgment, repeated in utter ignorance, "The bricks have fallen down, but we will rebuild with hewn stone; the sycamores are cut down, but we will replace them with cedars" (Isaiah 9:10). If the web had been forever, a Google search would probably return countless pages recording, after attacks, utterances throughout Judeo-Christian history of that quote. About 18 minutes into the program, Jonathan Cahn says about Isaiah 9:10 and the December 7, 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor that back then, "you don't have anyone quoting the Scripture of judgment." Perhaps, perhaps not. In the very center of the Internet's page of Pearl Harbor Quotes we read Isaiah 9:10, not in the NIV or NASB, because those versions were translated later, but in the King James Version. Cahn chose to present his message in a book of fiction. Not unlike the folks who think Star Wars is real, for many readers, Cahn's literary device blurs the distinction between truth and fiction. The requisite suspension of disbelief necessary to enjoy the elements of the story, a wary reporter, a surprised liaison, and an unnamed prophet with curious ancient seals, works to bias the reader who emerges from the novella into the real world lacking the desire to expend the mental energy necessary for an objective consideration of The Harbinger's theological claims. The first harbinger (i.e., a seal in the book's metaphor) is the 9/11 attack. Cahn says at about 6:30 into today's program that a first attack is a sign of God's judgment and that God's protection will be further lifted if the nation does not repent. Bob suggests to Cahn that not unlike 9/11, Pearl Harbor suffered 3,000 casualties, about 2,400 of whom were killed. We live here, today, and so we are inclined to discount far-flung attacks over the last 2,700 years and view the world, unsurprisingly, through our own eyes. Bob mentioned to Jonathan that years ago he had interviewed the beloved Hal Lindsey who, through a similar here-and-now-centered interpretation, suggested that the Second Coming would be in 1988. (This was not unlike superstitious European Christians who would panic when pestilence coincided with Halley's Comet, nor unlike those who thought Jesus would return on the Y2K computer bug, nor unlike those who thought that lightning strikes signified judgment from Zeus, until that is lightning rods ruined the divine aim. Superstition, sadly, is as rampant among Christian authors as it was among the Greeks who worshiped the pantheon.) We interpret our own suffering as though it were of biblical proportion, as Cahn said at about 21:40, that in addition to the harbingers (signs), America has suffered "economic collapse". Well, collapse means different things to different people. Within 48 hours of our prerecorded interview, Dow Jones reached an all time high, and at the very minute today's show began, Reuters reported, "Housing starts point to growing economic momentum." Compare that just to even recent decimation by tsunami, typhoon, earthquake, and to the countries bankrupted, the millions slaughtered, and tens of millions ruined by war, and even to the billions in Asia and Africa who've truly suffered debilitating poverty. That's economic collapse, whereas if God brought economic sanctions against America, it wouldn't look like a downturn, and it wouldn't primarily hurt the poor and middle class. Given the freedom to be arbitrary, fans of Nostradamus (who apparently predicted the second coming, to America in the year 2013, of Twinkies and Ding Dongs) and Jean Dixon point to fulfillment of prophecy. Ironically, Isaiah 9:10 itself is not even a prophecy, so any claimed fulfillment is metaphorical at best. However, The Harbinger itself fulfilled an actual prophecy, uttered in the very week of 9/11, at that End Times seminar, which predicted that such books would be written :). And I'm not even a prophet. Over a million Americans were killed in the civil and world wars. Weren't those lives worth a Bible verse? Around 25 minutes into the program, Bob agrees with The Harbinger, in that "for Israel, being a prophet was a matter of life or death" (p. 9). Enyart then explains that today, God has withdrawn His accountability system for prophets. Jonathan did not anticipate Bob's statement that stoning a false prophet to death is no longer commanded, nor permitted, by God, as the New Testament says, that with "the priesthood being changed [by Christ], of necessity there is also a change of the law" (Hebrews 7:12). So today, while Christians tend to forget and forgive (often without even admitting) the false prophecies of their brethren, unbelievers have long memories and stumble over our false prophecies and prophetic interpretations.     The actual parallel between Israel and America, regarding 732 B.C. and 2001, is only thematic, not divinely particular. When a nation ignores God, she becomes increasingly weak and vulnerable to destruction from within and without. Contrary to The Harbinger's emphasis (p. 19), this is true for Israel and America and for Italy, Germany, and Argentina. Christians disagree terribly over interpretation of the plain words in the Bible. Realize how loose our interpretations will then be of events! What is the meaning of a flood? An earthquake? An attack? It is God! Or perhaps it's the devil! Or was it, in fact, Osama bin Laden? Jesus disapproved of such interpretations of current events in Luke 13:1-5, and when Enyart debated D. James Kennedy's Professor of New Testament from Knox Theological Seminary, this very passage, regarding 2,000-year-old headlines of murder and a fallen tower, was central to the matter. The Harbinger makes the important observation that, "during national judgment, both the righteous and the wicked perish" (p. 30). Then Cahn writes, thankfully, that God was not with Al Qaeda, but he claimed this as part of the prophetic pattern, in that, God was not with Israel's enemies who attacked her. But again this is arbitrary, for there were plenty of times when God Himself orchestrated the attacks on Israel in punishment for her national adultery. Yet it is wrong to extrapolate from those extraordinary biblical interventions that, therefore, God is the one who orchestrates a molester's rape of a child, or the Holocaust. Attributing to God the designs of the wicked comes close to blasphemy, except that it is done in ignorance, although often, through negligent ignorance. Jonathan Cahn says, rightly I assert, that God was not with Al Qaeda, yet because of a degree of superstition, he then interprets defiance against Islamic terrorism as defiance against God. Is Israel defiant today against God? Yes. (Sadly, like America they are a nation of socialists who defend abortion and homosexuality.) Does that mean that Israel's defiance of Hamas is inherently condemnable? Of course not. Cahn takes a Time magazine reporter's perfectly valid quote as a double entendre, with the entire thrust of the book implying that the defiance is against God, even though it is typically explicitly stated, as in this case, that it is against Islamic terrorists. "Rebuilding Ground Zero was going to be America's statement of defiance," (p. 63, from July 1, 2008) "to those who attacked us."Four days after the attack on American on 9/11, in our End Times seminar at Winona Lake (home of a famous Bible center, Billy Sunday, and a prayer launch pad for Billy Graham's first crusade), I didn't have to stretch the details, as Jonathan does somewhat, to make far greater and more substantive parallels between 9/11 and the book of Revelation. The world trade center, her sins had reached to heaven, the nations, peoples, tongues, and languages, Babylon the great, is fallen, the kings of the earth see the smoke of her burning, standing at a distance for fear of her torment, watching the smoke of her ruin, the merchants of the earth have become rich through the abundance of her luxury, her plagues will come in one day, death and mourning, she will be utterly burned with fire, for strong is the Lord God who judges her, alas, that mighty city, for in one hour your judgment has come, their commerce has ceased, no merchandising today of gold and silver, precious stones and pearls, silk and scarlet, every kind of object, of wood, bronze, iron, and marble, incense, wine and oil, flour and wheat, cattle and sheep, pork bellies, and bodies and souls of men. For in the previous week, the targets of God's wrath, New York and Washington D.C. were debating the patent rights of the tiniest innocent babies, the embryos destroyed so that their bodies could be harvested and sold, by the Israelis, to businesses around the world, while American financial interests were angered that they may not be collecting the royalties they were demanding. And on the Hudson and in the New York harbor, all who travel by ship, and as many as trade on the sea, stood at a distance and cried out when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, "What is like this great city?" Both can't be correct, but either or both, the Harbinger and the Revelation 17-18 prophetic "parallels", could be wrong. As the above paragraph demonstrates, the more powerful and biblically extensive prophetic interpretation of 9/11 is not The Harbinger, but The Revelation. And that one is certainly wrong! For one, I intended it to be wrong. And secondly, if Revelation 18 was being fulfilled before our eyes on September 11, 2001 that would mean that we are now twelve years into Revelation chapter 19, and by now, the Second Coming should have occurred. So if the strong prophetic parallel (Revelation) isn't true, the weak one (Harbinger) probably isn't true either. Allow me to be petty. A sycamore tree and a Norwegian fir (the claimed sixth and seventh signs) do not come close to the extraordinary depth of substance and parallel between 9/11 and Revelation 17 and 18. Besides (and these are insignificant, but mentioned because such trivialities in reverse, are used in The Harbinger to make its point. The World Trade Center wasn't made of bricks. (On the contrary, it is noted for being the first supertall building to be made without masonry.) And yes, (p. 72) New York City and America rebuilt. But so did Berlin. And Rome, one could say. Destroyed cities throughout history rebuilt, with notable exceptions like Nineveh. Isaiah speaks of many sycamores, not one as at the WTC. And as Cahn acknowledges, that tree destroyed on 9/11 had the same name, sycamore, but it was a different kind of tree; in fact, a different species, and a different genus. And a different family, and a different order. If it were much different, it wouldn't be a tree, one could say. (But then again, what couldn't one say?) Isaiah says the Sycamores (plural, not singular) would be cut down (not crushed) and replaced with woods of cedar, not with a single pine tree. (2014 Update: And as the replacement of the tree was a sign of the end times, so was the removal of the tree, after it died, said Cahn.) The Harbinger also embraces the invalid contradiction of freedom yet being forced, justifying this by saying, "It takes two oars to make a boat go straight" (p. 86). Yes, but that boat illustration presents not even a theoretical contradiction, let alone an actual one. And the world isn't going straight, unless we mean straight to hell. Some of the claimed fulfillments of the prophetic pattern are really the same thing, repeated references to the attack itself, and tower falling, and the rebuilding, and the quoting, in hubris, it is true, of Isaiah 9:10 to rebuild, as by one significant government official who was… John Edwards? That disgraced non-official failed vice-presidential candidate. The 8th harbinger, coming with some peculiar justification in that spoken words are invisible, has to do with the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, which is as it should be because D.C. was also a target (although there was no harbinger from Shanksville, Pennsylvania, for that was not an intended target no doubt). A claim repeated about slavery and the civil war is that every drop of shed blood was due to the judgment of God. So then why could the British and much of the world end slavery without a similar judgment? (That could be answered, but would require prophetic interpretations specific to the unique history of each country.) And a biblical hewn stone did not need to be quarried from a mountain, let alone in upstate New York, though that claim adds flavor to the fiction and yet another confirmation of the prophecy! One would think that bureaucracy could not thwart a divine sign. That stone, though, that Jonathan writes so much about, being quarried and celebrated, ended up not as the cornerstone at ground zero but at a suburban office building. For Mayor Bloomberg, et al., changed the One World Trade Center design and diverted one of the harbingers… to Long Island. A few words about Jonathan Cahn. We don't think that we convinced him, nor even gave him pause. Yet, at the same time, we don't think that he loves God any less than we do, nor do we believe that God approves more of us than He does of Cahn. We're just asking God to help us to do our best to rightly divide, and to urge all believers to rightly divide, the Word of Truth. The Ten Commandments judge Roy Moore publicly apologized here on KGOV.com for misinterpreting something as simple as a court ruling. When the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the partial-birth abortion "ban", Judge Moore, currently Alabama's chief justice, praised that ruling as a godly pro-life victory. Traveling to Birmingham, Alabama we challenged him to actually read the opinion, and he did, and so admitted that it was the most brutally wicked ruling in the history of the U.S. Supreme Court (and that's saying something). So there's hope for Jonathan too :) The great upside of Cahn's book is its theme, which is the nation's desperate need to turn to God and the horror of losing His blessing, for as Jonathan quoted a Bible commentary, "The defiance of God shuts out immeasurable good" (p. 76). The Harbinger's downside though, is that many of its Christian readers will become even more superstitious. -Pastor Bob Enyart Denver Bible Church (See also Bob's Writings at KGOV.com/writings, and Bob's End Times seminar, and his super fun verse-by-verse study of the Book of Revelation!)  Today's Resources: Bob Enyart's Last Days Bible Studies! Have it your way! You can enjoy Bob's: * Last Days Bible teaching on the end times (downloadable or on MP3 CD) * End Times seminar in Indiana given the week of 9/11 (downloadable or on MP3 CD) * Verse-by-verse studies on 1 Corinthians and 1 & 2 Thessalonians, both of which address rapture passages, or * Bob's Bible Study on The Book of Revelation, or read the End Times chapter in Bob's life's work, * The Plot. With any of these resources, you'll get the benefit of decades of Bible research!* See Our Bible Study Resources: We invite you to check out our theologythursday.com or our monthly subscriptions.

Med Dred & Shaky Norman - Forward Melodicas http://www.dubophonic.com https://ffm.to/kpxnj84 Written by Shaky Norman and Med Dred, Forward Melodicas is the new tune by the two melodica virtuosos, opening year 2023 with more positive vibes. Both artists have already a rich discography on vinyl and digital releases. The new tune is presented as usual in the original version and the dub version by Med Dred, staying true to the culture of roots reggae music. It is available from all major online stores for streaming and download.

Interview by Haze of DGB https://www.instagram.com/mike_tall We recently linked up with Tampa rapper Yung Dred for an exclusive “Off The Porch” interview! During our sit-down he talked about the protests going on across the country right now, life in Tampa right now, jumping off the porch, the buzzing music scene in Tampa right now, his breakthrough single “Blue Strips”, working with Lil Baby on the remix, touring overseas with Rich The Kid & Jay Critch, his & Richie Wess' label YTC, explains why he has remained independent, gives advice for upcoming artists who are about to meet with the labels, his new single “Been Outside” featuring Tae Bae that did over 300k views in one week, DJ Spinatik, explains what DGB means to him and much more!

The work culture has the power to enable or destroy individuals. Cultivating an environment where everyone is respected and valued, resulting in higher employee retention rates and positive business outcomes can be more challenging than it seems. We Discuss how to create a forward thinking, flexible and diverse workplace that promotes growth for everyone involved. In this episode we discuss… The moving target of fulfillmentHow to increase diversity in the hiring processEvolving as a work culture for the betterment of allMindfulness and meditation for becoming a better leader About Our Guest JJ DiGeronimo shares leadership and inclusion strategies to retain, develop and advance professional women. Her work is featured in many publications, including Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, and Thrive Global. JJ includes these experiences along with hours of research in her award-winning book "Accelerate Your Impact," which complements her first award-winning book, "The Working Woman's GPS." In addition to her books and keynotes, JJ is a featured columnist and host of the popular podcast – Career Strategies for Women that Work. Resources Mentioned on the Show https://jjdigeronimo.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/jjdigeronimo/https://www.youtube.com/user/jjdigeronimohttps://www.espeakers.com/marketplace/profile/23273?btsc=1https://www.facebook.com/JJDiGeronimoOfficial The Transcript JJ DiGeronim: We are conditioned to look outward or look reflect on the past that we don't often really appreciate, accept or drop into the moment that we're in. And I didn't realize that initially, and it wasn't in my tech career that I was able to give myself that space. I guess I wasn't ready yet, but when I moved to entrepreneurship, that's when kind of my hit my tower card where everything around me started to crumble because I was so unsettled on the inside. And I think for many leaders, you're never going to be able to lead others until you lead yourself. And I think for many of us, we think leadership is not for many of us. But in many situations, leaders are often seen as a power position, which is kind of backwards because leadership is really in and in an empowering position, empowering others. But if you don't feel whole yourself, it's very difficult to empower others because often times you haven't really been able to authentically empower yourself. James Laws: Welcome to another episode of the Leading to Fulfillment podcast, where everything we talk about is meant to encourage people first. Leaders empower individuals to find fulfillment and to help your organizations become places people love to work. I'm your host, James Laws, and I have a great show in store for you. My guest for this episode is JJ DiGeronim. JJ shares leadership and inclusion strategies to retain, develop and advance professional women. Her work is featured in many publications, including Forbes, The Wall Street Journal and Thrive Global. She includes these experiences along with her hours of research and her award winning book, Accelerate Your Impact, which complements her first award winning book, The Working Woman's GPS and a decent in addition to her books and keynotes, JJ is a featured columnist and host of the popular podcast Career Strategies for Women that Work. My conversation with JJ we discuss the moving target of fulfillment, how to increase diversity in the hiring process, evolving as a work culture for the betterment of all, and mindfulness and meditation for becoming a better leader. But before we get into all of that, I want to invite you to subscribe and give leading to the Leading to Fulfillment podcast to review with your favorite podcast tool. We're over on Apple, Google, Podcasts, Spotify, and you can even watch us over on YouTube. And if we are in the place that you like to listen to podcast, please let me know and I will make sure to fix that. As a bonus, you can head on over to ciircles.com that circles with two eyes and I and subscribe over to our newsletter. There we let you know when new episodes drop as well as send you original and curated content on leadership, managing teams and fulfillment. Now that we have all that business out of the way, let's jump into my conversation with JJ Geronimo. JJ Thank you so much for being on the Leading Fulfillment podcast today. I really appreciate you taking the time. JJ DiGeronim: I'm thrilled to be here, James. James Laws: So to kind of get this started so everyone who knows who's listened to this show recognizes right, that a lot of what we're doing on this podcast is trying to become better leaders. We're trying to help leaders discover what it means to be a people first leader, put their team, sometimes even not just before themselves, but sometimes before their organizations. And thinking about like, how do we actually take care of our company by taking care of our team? And I know that's been a lot in your journey, but to kind of kick it off and so everybody kind of gets to know who you are. Could you just take a moment to introduce yourself? JJ DiGeronim: Sure. Sure. So I've been in the tech industry most of my career, and it wasn't until I was close to 40 that I started building some women's groups, working on some DNI initiatives, which really led me to collecting stories of all the things that people use to keep themselves energized, focused and aligned to their inner compass. And that is really what had catapulted me into writing books, is to really share those stories with other professionals and especially professional women. And through that work, I started learning more and more about their challenges, their desires, their goals. And women would come to me and say, How do I get promoted? How do I get on a board? Where is the best place to find a sponsor? And so I collected all of these questions throughout my travels, throughout my women's groups and conversations, and that really was the catalyst for my second book, Accelerate Your Impact. And now with even further work and really developing the leader within is really the catalyst for what I'm putting together for my third book. James Laws: I love it. So we know that, you know, the title of the podcast is Leading to Fulfillment, and I feel like we should probably start there. When you think about fulfillment, you know, we've all been on an airplane. Most of us anyway have been on airplane. And I've heard the instructions. Right, especially about the oxygen mask. You have to take care of yourself before you take care of someone seated next to you. And in fulfillment, I think in a lot of ways this works the same way as a leader. If you aren't fulfilled, if you haven't discovered your path towards fulfillment, it's going to be very hard for you to help your team and the people around you also find fulfillment. So let's start there. How do you for your self interpret fulfillment? JJ DiGeronim: Well, that's a great question. And I would have to say that my answer would have been very different. A decade ago because I didn't really understand the dynamics of our ego and how that plays into our self-doubts and distracts us from our self-worth. And so if I answered the question a decade ago, I would say things like related to things that I did, accolades I received positions I landed. But now that I'm in the work and I'm working from the inside out, I really realized that fulfillment and leadership actually starts within. As you talk about in many, many episodes. But it's more than just like, how do I feel inside? It's really about digging into the stories, the feelings and the energies that are really impacting not only how you feel, but how you make decisions. And I think for many of us, we don't even know how to fulfill ourselves because we're often distracted by these external metrics that we are told in an early age define our self-worth and how much we like ourselves. James Laws: Wow. So, you know, there's a lot to kind of unpack there. And I'd love to hear about a little bit of this journey. You talk about like how you would answer this ten years ago, and I can I can reflect that back to you. I think that's very true. Right. Like the way I saw the world, even 20, ten years ago, 20 years ago, is vastly different than how I see it today. I it's it's amazing for me to even look back and think about the things that I believed about myself, about the world, how different they are today. And, and the world, strangely, hasn't changed all that much, although I think to me it feels like it has. It's I've changed. My positions have changed. My thoughts have changed. Tell me a little bit about this journey, this this journey of ten years where the motivation has gone less outward and gone more inward. JJ DiGeronim: So I would have to say that I was really that my journey accelerated once I decided to pursue entrepreneurship. Now this I love my job. I love technology. I love the people I work for. But my inner calling was so strong that I felt like I had to really pursue my life's work, which is much of what I'm doing around women, and especially women in the workplace. And in leaving many of the things that we define ourselves by, which is our role, our salary, you know, who we hang out with, like the companies we work for. When you strip all of those things away, there are many books out there that talk about the nakedness of how you feel when you don't have these external metrics to define not only yourself, but how successful you think you are. And for many entrepreneurs that have jumped into their own space, their own roles, it's a daunting jump. You think you're going to do it for a bigger purpose and more meaning and all of these things. But in the reality, you have to really work from the inside out because you encounter money issues, self-doubt, relationships, situations that go well beyond the work that you're doing. And I think for many of us, we don't often have to dig through that crap if you have all of these barriers of protection around you. James Laws: Interesting. I you know, you talk about a lot of the fulfillment that you found in in your current work, right. Which is centered around a lot of like women in the workplace. And I also run a tech company. You've have a huge history, a much longer history in tech than I do. And and I think about when I look at how I lead and and thinking about what my team needs, I realize, right. Like I a big part of that is me taking a step back and listening to my team and learning from them, learning who they are and what makes them up. And I'm ashamed to admit it. Our team is not as diverse as we want it to be, although we have been working really hard on that. And that has been a huge priority because like all businesses, I think I've said this before in another episode, like like a lot of businesses when you start out, it's entrepreneurship and you get that first hiring you, you hire in a, in a small like echo chamber, a small circle. And so they end up being a lot of people that look like you because they're the people you hang out with on a regular basis. And now if you have a very diverse, small echo chamber, that's awesome. And you're probably better for it. But if you're not and you didn't have that, your company starts to look pretty monotone, pretty flat, and it's all the same. And so over the years we've recognized that we've done that and we've needed to change that. And we didn't do it intentionally. But it does intentions doesn't matter. By accident, we became this kind of monoculture and so we started to work on that. So years ago, started to work on this and trying to change and flip that script and kind of say like, we don't want to be that way. We know that we would be better if we were more diverse. I wonder, as we're actually in the process of hiring, as I am recording this, maybe not when this goes live, but as I'm recording this, we're actually in the in the throes of hiring a leadership position within our organization. And we want to, especially because it's a leadership position, want to open that up to a more diverse, a diverse pool of people and hopefully change the dynamic of our own organization. What advice would you give to someone like myself who's maybe right in the midst of the hiring process and trying to say, Hey, how do I bring in more women, more people of color, more whatever to to change the dynamic of their organization? JJ DiGeronim: Yes. Yes. Well, I love just your viewpoint, the honesty and authenticity of what you've gone through. And oftentimes you're hiring because you just have to get the work done and you're going to leverage people you know, that know people that are going to get it done. You're not necessarily even concerned color or what shape or what size or what they do. You just have to get the work done. And I know everyone that I've worked with, including myself, have been in that a different at different times in my career. But as you pursue more diverse talent, often you can tap on people in your network that hang out with those people that know those people. So whether it's people on your board, people in your partner community, or people that you work with, letting them know you're putting this role out there and that you're really looking to get diverse thoughts at the table. So it's one thing to hire diverse people, but really encompassing or empowering diverse thought is critical. Second, you really need to look at your job description and see what the National Center for Women in Technology, a nonprofit funded by many government grants and other funding sources. They do a lot of work for women in tech and women in STEM and really talk through and give you strategies and toolkits and check list and how to more effectively not only find hire but retain diverse talent. And they will tell you that JavaScript engines of the links are critical. So not only do you have to look at all the language you use in the job description, but also the like, most women often want to be closer to the 100% mark when applying for a job. Men feel comfortable around 60%. So if you have a list of 20 requirements, you're probably going to get most of them. Just the way it goes. So what I always say is really create your job description with the summary must have 5 to 7, must haves 3 to 5. If you have done this or still were interested in speaking with you and you know, kind of things, that would be nice to have after that. So making it more inviting, I think, and it's not because women can't do the work, but oftentimes they have to shift their entire life to change that role. So it's not just about changing their job. They're changing their life. And many women have a lot of built up capital in their existing companies that allow them to freely move to do the other things that are required in their lives. So that's a lot to give up. So it has to be really a good reason to leave. And, you know, diverse men don't always have the same challenges. I often focus on women, but it is good to think about how you are writing the job descriptions, what network you're using, and what is critical to getting the job done. James Laws: Now. Great advice. Shout out to our to my friends over underrepresented in tech they are helping us actually go through and make sure that we are presenting not a fake image but a true image of what we actually want to be and what we strive to be and what our values are and to reach out to some, to a larger variety of people for that purpose. I love I love what you said. You know, it's funny, I think a lot about the words that we use when we write a job description and trying to hone that in and make sure that it's it is inclusive and clear and succinct and work on doing that. I never thought about, though, you know, necessarily the length of how many of the how many of these responsibilities are or is this a three page job description or a one page job description, which is a very different take than I have heard now when hiring. That's one thing. It's one thing to say, all right, we're going to put out the best job description we can possibly put out. We're going to, you know, put out the, you know, who we really are. But also be honest with what we are trying to accomplish and who we are trying to become. Because to me, that is that is perhaps one of the most important part of hiring is I don't hire to find culture fit. I hire to find culture growth. I'm trying to grow as a culture and not just stay the way we are. I love the way we are, but I still think we can be better. And so I think I diverse workforce helps us be better versions of ourselves. Now the question I have and it's I'll, I'll throw this to you specifically in, in what your focus is, which is on women, it's one thing to put out the application to get the job description, to get the diverse applicants in. It's another thing that once they're in your organization to be a place that is safe and to be a place that is a place where everyone can thrive. What do you find the struggles are for women in organizations in the workplace that they're dealing with? JJ DiGeronim: Well, generally, when you have then a culture of similar people, it's hard because you don't even realize the dynamics that you've been creating for the culture in which you exist. And so there's many cultures I've been to that their favorite thing to do is to throw darts and drink beer, and they do it every Thursday night and it is a huge piece of their culture. And so I think sometimes just sort of thinking about what have you been doing for a long time? What defines your culture, what will be engaging or a way to engage people in new ways? So maybe you can still keep doing that, but maybe don't do it every Thursday. Or maybe you do something on Tuesdays or maybe do something in the mornings. It doesn't really matter. I just think like kind of what got you there might not get you where you want to go next. And just thinking about the behaviors, mannerisms, connections, the way you interact, the way you get together, the way you have fun together, you know, what does that look like? And is that such a close knit group of people? Is there room for other people to feel like they can be part of it? James Laws: No, that's great advice. You know, although I feel a little exposed because four years ago you just described kind of a regular afternoon at the company when we were co-located, it was darts and beer. Like that was a very common thing that happened. And I as we've tried to change, I've noticed that I myself have even become more uncomfortable with you know, I think what happens a lot in tech is this kind of bro culture. And what has what I noticed was we just came back from our annual retreat. We had just gone distribute it fully in 2019 and COVID happened and we didn't end up having our retreat and had been a couple of years. We finally got to the point where we felt safe enough to throw our company retreat. We got it together and we hired someone to cater our meals and come in and a chef and got a little more than we bargained for. This this chef brought a sound system and was going to entertain and do all this stuff. We just thought they were bringing food, but I notice that he that this particular individual was making jokes that were very bro culture, very misogynistic, very just uncomfortable. And they were making me uncomfortable. And the rest I think the rest of the team just kind of like laughed it off and was fine, but I feel very uncomfortable by it. And I was and I realize is because I feel like that's what we were and that's not who we are and who we were trying to be. But I also looked if if I were this caterer coming into this company and I saw the team, we we were definitely heavy on guys over women. And so, yeah, I, he, he probably thought he was pandering to the crowd, although he wasn't. And so it was a very uncomfortable situation. And I wonder what are some practices other than, yes, we have to think differently, but what are some actual or practical like if somebody's listening today and they're like, Yeah, I found myself stuck in this culture. I have also found myself trapped in a culture that is perhaps set in their ways. It's the way we've always done it. But the team is changing, the dynamics are changing, the workforce is changing. And so because of that, we have to change and adapt with it. What are some practical, maybe actionable things you might encourage a business leader to consider in their organizations? JJ DiGeronim: Well, first, I just want to really compliment you on your evolution, because I really think that leaders and leadership is about empowering the people around you. That is what leadership is. And so the fact that you even recognize that, hey, this doesn't feel so good anymore means you've evolved. And it's likely that the people on your team are evolving with you too, even if it might not be as evident as it may look from the outside. So that's great news. I think the other thing is just, you know, the idea of these events and activities is to give some camaraderie, to enhance the culture and allow people to feel comfortable to work together in good and bad times. And so I think just assessing kind of is it working? Is what you're doing working? Are some people just traditionally not showing up?Are there some groups, you know, do you have clicks either subgroups? Are there ways that you can start to break this up a little bit by introducing new ways of getting together? You know, if everyone plays bocce ball or everybody eats these like we I used to join a company where eating the super duper hamburger was like the induction, you know? And it was great initially, but it didn't work for that long after we got about 50 people and it's just kind of like a SAS thing and looking to see because ideally as a leader you're trying to get the most out of the people you've hired and in a way that makes sense and that they're excited about too. And I think in tech it's hard sometimes to be a leader because the pace is ridiculous and everything is like A-plus. Plus, in regards to when it needs to get done, like this is has to be done like right now, this minute, every minute. And it's hard to lead when everything has the same priority. And so the leadership role in these tech companies is really deciding what is. Yes. Right now, because there's not as much staff, there's not as many people leading in these companies and wanting to join these companies. And you can't burn your staff and team out. You just can't. So as a leader deciding what to focus on, when is one of your most instrumental roles? James Laws: That is something that I had been feeling over the last few years, especially the pressure and the energy rate of how fast we feel like we always have to go and how I could see it burning out myself and my team members. And we one of the things that we started to do really is say, why? Why do we have to go so fast? What are our goals? What is success look for like for us? And if we redefine success, can we also redefine the culture of how we work? So to those listening, if you are in the tech business and maybe you feel you're caught in that trap of like it's 120 miles per hour all the time, everything is important, everything is urgent, everything's got to get done. I would really encourage you to ask why. Like why? Because I what I started to realize now is our now if you if you would actually look at our calendar for our year, we probably spend 30 to 40% of that off not on project, not on work, not doing, you know, what we call intermissions. It's it's breaks, it's breathing time. It's just slow down. Like we're not in that big of a hurry, honestly, because when ultimately what my goal is right is that the people that work for me continue to be able to work for me and have fulfilling lives both in their work and in their personal lives and in their families and all the things that they choose to do. So I want all of that to be integrated together as much as possible. And I know that working them to the bone doesn't solve that problem for anyone, and it doesn't actually make it. It doesn't actually guarantee your success either. What does guarantee your success, though, is a group of people who love the company, who love what they do, believe it matters, and see the impact that their work has, and know that when they leave, at the end of the day, they're not depleted, but they're filled and they're excited to spend time doing other things and know that they will have the energy to come back to work the next day. And that's Dred doing it. So my hope, my whole mission is to get rid of case of the Mondays and excited about the week and and that those things are great. I mean they're they're right but you should be able to have a great weekend on Wednesday if that's what you need to rejuvenate you and get you excited about your work. I want to I want to shift I want to come back to that fulfillment conversation because you have a coaching course that you release, that you've released called The Ten Lessons I Gain from My Mindfulness. And I love the concept of mindfulness. I love the idea of slowing down. That's kind this is my rough segway, our whole our whole schedule. I told everyone in my company, I've said this on the podcast a number of times, every single person that we hire is paid to think they're not just paid to do stuff, they're paid to think. And if they're not thinking, then we're not getting the most that we can for the organization and for the health of the company. But part of that thinking is slowing down and spending time inside and being mindful and being present. And I want to hear a little bit about your journey towards mindfulness. JJ DiGeronim: Well, first, I just want to comment that I don't think you'll have any problem finding people to join your team. You are amazing in the way that you approach your company, how you feel about your employees, the culture you're creating to really fuel the people that make your business possible. And I know this is what people are looking for. They don't want to be a number. They don't want to be executing every single day. And 16 things they want meaning. They want purpose, they want alignment and they want to do good work. And I feel like probably this podcast has been very helpful, but the other things you're doing have really round you out as a leader that will attract the energy of the people that will appreciate what you're creating. So congratulations there for sure. James Laws: I appreciate that. JJ DiGeronim: You know, mindfulness is part of that, too. It's about giving yourself space to recognize what your thoughts are. And I think for many of us, when we are so busy doing all the time, we can easily live in the future of what we need to get done or reflect on the past of what has already happened. And for many of us, we are very rarely in the present moment. And the present moment is where often you experience more joy and more excitement about life because you're actually in the moments you're creating. But unfortunately, the way society has molded us, we are so busy trying to get there wherever there may be, that we never really have the space, as you mentioned, to appreciate where we are right now. And everything that's happening isn't happening in the moment you're in. That's it. That's what life is about. But we are conditioned to look outward or look reflect on the past that we don't often really appreciate, accept or drop into the moment that we're in. And I didn't realize that initially, and it wasn't in my tech career that I was able to give myself that space. I guess I wasn't ready yet, but when I moved to entrepreneurship, that's one kind of my hit my tower card where everything around me started to crumble because I was so unsettled on the inside. And I think for many leaders, you're never going to be able to lead others until you lead yourself. And I think for many of us, we think leadership is not for many of us. But in many situations, leaders are often seen as a power position, which is kind of backwards because leadership is really in and in an empowering position, empowering others. But if you don't feel whole yourself, it's very difficult to empower others because oftentimes you haven't really been able to authentically empower yourself. And so mindfulness is a tool that really gives you the ability to see what you say to yourself all the time where you spend your time. Is it in the past? Is it in the future? What are you saying to yourself on a regular basis, and are you able to really center into where you are right now? Because when you really teach yourself to do that, you have a lot more appreciation for not only who you are, but who other people are too. James Laws: One of the practices that I have over the years slowly started to integrate more into my life is this idea of meditation and and mindfulness meditation and this idea of just being present in the moment and letting the thoughts kind of calm, note them, let them pass through and not that worry about what it is or what it isn't. And just it is like it just is and just be in that moment. And I found that for me as a as a business leader and as somebody honestly who is a idea person who generates a lot of ideas sometimes to the to the detriment of my company and my team generates a lot of ideas that that that time of mindfulness, that time of just the pause or what I like to call my scheduled boredom, where I just I schedule it to do nothing. I have nothing to do. There's nothing to do but sit and just be in. That moment is a huge it's a huge moment of clarity where things start to untangle themselves because there is no agenda, there is no output that I'm seeking from it. And sometimes when you let go of the need for the output, the need for the outcome or the objective, things start to unravel a little bit better and and get cleaner and better understood. What are some of your recommendations to leaders listening who are perhaps looking to start a mindfulness practice of their own and or never maybe are just hearing about it? I'm like, I don't even know what this mindfulness is. How would somebody get started doing something like this? JJ DiGeronim: Yeah, I mean, there's usually a compelling event. You're tired or exhausted, you're over work, you're depleted, you're depressed. I mean, something is happening and you're like, This is not working for me. Mindfulness, designed by Jon Kabat-Zinn, is really just being mindful of your thoughts. What are you telling yourself all the time? When you get a new idea, when you finish your project, you start something new. What are you saying to yourself on a regular basis? I believe mindfulness is a critical piece of meditation because I did not realize that when you meditate, you're still going to have thoughts. Those thoughts don't just all disappear because you're meditating. And when you're meditating, you're really not creating lists of things you should be doing. The idea is, is that you're mindful of the thoughts that pass, but as soon as we come in, just saying, I see you and letting them pass by, if you hold on to any one thought and then start dissecting it, designing it, organizing it, listing it, you're not meditating, you're planning your brainstorming, you're working. And so I think really recognizing that meditation is a practice to not hold on to any one thought. And for me, that was a lesson that took me years to learn because I had been molded to believe that my self worth came based on my output, my actions, the things I got done. And when I tried to start meditation, I started thinking. I started doing, I started creating, which was gone, which is how I was essentially taught to be successful and like myself. And so I had to unravel all of that mind chatter and self-defined stories to really allow myself the space to be quiet, to be bored, to let the ideas come and go. And I think that that is a big exercise of self compassion and self love that takes years to get to. James Laws: Absolutely. And I'm not even close. But I would say to those listening, it's also a great tool. Right. Like I agree. Right. There is a separation of spending time in meditation and not holding on to the thought and not turning it into a work session like an ideation session. But it's also a great precursor into an edition session. If youre wanting to solve a problem, mindfulness and meditation at the beginning of that process can be a great way to prepare yourself for great and more meaningful and more clarity in those ideas as you start to develop that. Would you agree with that? JJ DiGeronim: Well, let me just expand on why you want to do this. And to your point that you've already touched on already is you're creating space for the ideas to flow. And I think my biggest awakening is that I don't have to do it alone. I don't have to figure everything out by myself, by creating space, allows for channels, for things, for intuition, ideas, innovation to come through me. And I think that is really the gift that comes out of it is now you are a channel to bring things in that you might not think of on your own. James Laws: That's yeah, absolutely. I know we're a little crunched for time. And so I want to and I feel like we could talk for hours about a whole number of issues. So I hope you'll agree to come back on the show as a follow up in the future. But for those who really enjoyed what you had to say and want to learn more about you and find you and maybe you perhaps a little bit more about your course, I want to give the final word. JJ DiGeronim: Oh, thank you so much. Well, I'm easy to find. I'm JJ DeGeronimo. LinkedIn is obviously my favorite platform, but you can also find me on my website. Most of the resources that are there and most of them are free. So if you're interested in picking up any of those, they are available to you. And if you're looking to inspire your women's groups or ERG groups, I spend a lot of time on the roads with those groups, really helping them accelerate their impact in their desires. So I look forward to joining many more as we continue to come out of the lockdown. James Laws: Absolutely. Well, we're going to put links to everything in the show notes so that everybody can get in touch with you. JJ, thank you so much for being on the show today and just giving us even a snippet of some of the wealth of experience that you've had on your journey. And again, I hope you'll join us in the future. JJ DiGeronim: Oh, thank you so much. This was really enjoyable. Thanks for the time and the invite. James Laws: Bye bye. What a fantastic conversation and a big thank you to JJ DeGeronimo for joining me on this episode. Everything we mentioned, including a full transcript of the show, is available over on our website and you can access at any time by visiting. Leadingtofulfillment.com/021. I want to share how we build the kind of company people love to work for. At my company Saturday Drive. I hope these strategies will be useful to some of you in your current and future endeavors. You know, nothing would make me happier than knowing that Saturday Drive is a catalyst for the creation of more people forward fulfilling companies. So let's talk about them. We defined core values with our team in mind. We prioritize fulfillment and we focused on progress over productive or activity. We rejected work life balance in favor of work life integration, and we offered benefits that actually benefit our team. So what kind of leader do you want to be? Do you want to lead a team that shows up out of obligation, ready to slog through the day and simply tolerate their jobs? I can't think of anything worse. You want a team fueled by passion. A team that finds their work fulfilling and strives for progress. A team that loves the work that they do and the company that they do it for. Not only is that a huge benefit for them, but it also makes your company better as a whole. You get back what you give. This is true in every area of life, but business leaders tend to forget it. They become takers, draining their employees dry without giving back. Then they wonder why the work is subpar or why they keep losing great people. I want to challenge you to give, give your employees the tools and guidance they need to flourish and find fulfillment. When you do, you'll have built the kind of company where people love to work. Thanks for listening and I hope you'll join me on the next episode. And until then, may your businesses be successful as you lead your teams to fulfillment.

Discrimination can take many forms. When J.D. and Ethel Shelley simply tried to purchase a house, they found themselves involved in a landmark legal case to fight for their right to move into their property. They were battling a restrictive covenant that tried to exclude them based on their race. ——— Click on search links to see if there are episodes with related content:  Cicely Hunter, Landmarks, Black History, Civil Rights, Podcast Transcript: I'm Cicely Hunter, Public Historian from the Missouri Historical Society, and here's history, on eighty-eight-one, KDHX. ——— For St. Louis to be named the 10th segregated city in the United States might have come as a surprise to those who heard it back in 2017, but St. Louis's history is similar to many other urban cities. With all the hidden gems and history that surrounds this city, racial segregation became more fixed and evident as public policies and private practices tightened restrictions against Black communities. But these instances of discrimination and racism were often contested. We can look to Shelley v Kraemer, a court case that was argued in the Supreme Court and outlawed state enforced restrictive covenants. ———- J.D. and Ethel Shelley and their children moved from Mississippi to Missouri. They were looking to purchase a home, so Elder Robert Bishop, who was their pastor and a realtor, showed them 4600 Labadie Avenue. The Shelley's loved the home so much that they made an offer, and it was accepted. But, since the house had a restrictive covenant, the Shelley's racial identity became a determining factor that restricted Black people from entering, purchasing, or occupying certain areas based on residential segregation. ——— The Marcus Avenue Improvement Association with Fern and Louis Kraemer as the plaintiffs were determined to stop the Shelley family from living in their newly purchased home. The Circuit Court ruled that the restrictive covenant was poorly executed since the property owners failed to sign the document. Then, the Missouri Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decision and argued the restrictive covenant remained a legitimate agreement. The final ruling by the Supreme Court on May 3, 1948, established that restrictive covenants violated the Fourteenth Amendment and could not be judicially enforced even though it was a private contract. ——— St. Louis was important to the civil rights movement, and at the center of Black legal resistance, with court cases like Shelley v Kraemer and Gaines v Canada, and Dred and Harriet Scott's freedom suit. In 1988, the Shelley House was dedicated as a National Historic Landmark and served as a “living memorial to the Shelley family and their fight against racial discrimination.” ——— Here's history is a joint production of the Missouri Historical Society and KDHX. I'm Cicely Hunter and this is eighty-eight-one, KDHX, St. Louis. ———

Not far from where https://www.sos.mo.gov/mdh/curriculum/dredscott (Dred and Harriet Scott) submitted the freedom suit which ultimately became a https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/60/393/ (historic Supreme Court case), stands a new memorial commemorating all freedom suits filed by slaves in St. Louis between 1812 and 1865. Freedom's Home, the name given to the sculpture by the artist Preston Jackson, is the hard work of many specifically The Honorable https://yourmissourijudges.org/judges/mason/ (Judge David C. Mason). Saint Louis In Tune discussed the upcoming unveiling of the sculpture with Judge Mason and sculptor http://www.prestonjacksonart.com/ (Preston Jackson) and the meaning for all. [01:00] Judge David C. Mason Interview Timeframe of Project [02:01] What is a https://www.sos.mo.gov/archives/education/aahi/beforedredscott/history_freedomsuits (Freedom Suit)? [06:15] Plaintiffs, defendants, attorneys [08:45] What was legal and upheld in court all of a sudden changed [13:46] The discovery of the https://libguides.wustl.edu/c.php?g=47391&p=303603 (Freedom Suits files stored in boxes) [19:49] A few https://www.stlcitycircuitcourt.com/FreedomSuits/MemorialSculptureCCB.htm (more details) [21:02] Choosing a sculptor [24:45] What should be the takeaway for people who view the memorial? [26:34] https://www.facebook.com/FreedomSuitsMemorial (Donations; a virtual learning system planned) [31:12] A current story of change [36:57] Preston Jackson Interview [37:42] Researching for the sculpture [39:28] Challenge of the sculpture [40:47] Process from start to finish [42:32] Time from start to finish [45:05] Perspectives of the sculpture views [46:02] Takeaway from the artist's viewpoint This is Season 5! For more episodes, go to https://stlintune.com/ (stlintune.com) #dredscott #harriettscott #supremecourt #stlouis #courts #freedomsuits

Coming up this week on The Escape Pod... cast. We talk about the CG original creation, 50R-T, and their arrival on the holotables. We also discuss what we are thinking of the 3V3 GAC in the new era of the mode. We announce our Bring Hondo to the Holotables campaign that will be delivered to Capital Games' hands in person. And our special guest this week is Dred Zeppers. All this and breaking news as and if it happened, right here on The Escape Pod... cast. BRING HONDO TO SWGOH: https://www.change.org/p/bring-hondo-to-swgoh Want to donate to the show directly? https://streamlabs.com/paulanthonyslawinski Guest: Dred Zeppers https://twitch.tv/DrZeppers Vault 37 Studios: twitch.tv/Vault37Studios The Bounty Hunnies Discord Server https://discord.gg/JqnWKuw Planet Courscant Discord: https://discord.gg/mmyjmBXYmv SWGoH Events Server: https://discord.gg/ueCRbCTcG2 The Nerdy Network: http://www.goingnerdy.com/ We highly reccomend SWGOH Sheets: https://discord.gg/UvgxH3z Join our Discord channel and get access to the hosts and other benefits! - https://discord.gg/7aCczRx The Escape Pod... Recruiting server - https://discord.gg/NA2HHas The Nev - https://www.youtube.com/user/Neilandreweyre and https://discord.gg/YnqCqPz HELPFUL RESOURCES Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheEscapePodCastaways/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TEPCastaways YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheEscapePodcast To support our channel: https://www.patreon.com/TheEscapePod HotUtils Music bed: The Final Battle Of Superheroes by WinnieTheMoog Link: https://filmmusic.io/song/7418-the-final-battle-of-superheroes License: https://filmmusic.io/standard-license --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/theescapepodcast/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/theescapepodcast/support

In the great march for civil rights and social justice, few stories of enslaved people are as compelling as the story of Dred and Harriet Scott and their family.  They ultimately gained freedom, but not through the courts as they intended.  Just press play to hear the whole story. ------  Click on search links to see if there are episodes with related content: Cicely Hunter, Black History, Civil Rights, Legal Matters, People of Note, ------  Podcast Transcript: I'm Cicely Hunter, Public Historian from the Missouri Historical Society, and here's history, on eighty-eight-one, KDHX. ——— The story of Dred and Harriet Scott is one that students often hear about in schools across the country. The Scotts' infamous court case demonstrated how African Americans fought for their freedom through the legal system. Though their story is one of the most well-known, there were hundreds of cases like theirs in St. Louis between 1814 and 1860. Over the course of 11 years, their case, which began in the St. Louis Circuit Court would reach the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court, with a disheartening decision that found Dred, Harriet, and their two children, Eliza and Lizzie Scott, as enslaved people. ——— Dred Scott was born in Virginia around 1800 and was enslaved by the Blow family. After he was sold to Dr. John Emerson, a surgeon of the US Army, Dred traveled with him to Fort Armstrong, near Rock Island, Illinois. By 1836, Dr. Emerson relocated to Fort Snelling, located in the free territory of Wisconsin, and where Dred met and married Harriet. ——— The Scotts sued Dr. Emerson's widow in 1846 for their freedom. In the final Supreme Court decision in 1857, Chief Justice Roger Taney stated African Americans “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect,” because they were not considered citizens and could not pursue legal action in federal court. ——— Though the Scotts did not win their freedom as they had hoped in 1857, Mrs. Emerson soon remarried a U.S. Congressman and abolitionist, who quickly transferred ownership of the Scotts to Taylor Blow, the son of Peter Blow, so they could be emancipated. ——— Here's history is a joint production of the Missouri Historical Society and KDHX. I'm Cicely Hunter and this is eighty-eight-one, KDHX, St. Louis. ———    

B. Cox reviews R&B singer Adriana Evans self-titled debut album Adriana Evans as it turns 25. The daughter of jazz singer Mary Stallings, Evans emerged in the mid-90s featuring on her future collaborator and producer (and also future husband) Jonathan 'Dred' Scott's 1994 album Breakin' Combs. After starting with Capitol Records when she started recording her debut, she landed on hip-hop powerhouse label Loud Records to finish and release her album. Working with Scott and musician and arranger Rastine Calhoun III, the album featured 12 tracks of power packed music; featuring a blend of jazz and classic soul music with contemporary R&B and hip-hop serving as the soundtrack to her sweet yet powerful vocals. The album featured two singles: "Seeing Is Believing" and "Love Is All Around" which both charted on the Billboard R&B charts.Unfortunatey, due what seems to be a lack of substansial promotion and marketing from the label and a release that was timed during a explosively successful year in the R&B game, her debut went largely unnoticed from the masses, aside from a group of dedicated fans who praised the album's content her effortless vocal abilities. After taking a hiatus from the music industry following her debut, she emerged seven years later after a sabbatical in Brazil and released four more albums after fading from the public eye after 2012.In her absence in the public eye, her debut album has attracted a cult following in the years gone by. Fans continue to praise the album and even a quarter of century later, it is still being discovered by fans every day. Due to the album not being available on streaming services, physical copies are a commodity and widely sought after; making the album one of the rarest finds on the secondary market.Visit The Vault Classic Music Reviews Onlinewww.vaultclassicpod.comLearn More About the "Podcast GPS" BootCamp Course!www.vaultclassicpod.com/podcastgpsSupport The Vault Classic Music Review on Buy Me A Coffeehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/vaultclassicpodShow NotesDiscogs: Adriana Evans-Adriana Evans (1997). Release Infohttps://www.discogs.com/release/1570592-Adriana-Evans-Adriana-EvansThe R&B Representers: Catch That! Episode 21: Dart Adams-Adriana Evans self titled debuthttps://youtu.be/gKlmSPzclvMSinematic06 Youtube Page: Adriana Evans Planet Groove BET Live in Washington D.C. 1997 Part 1 and Part 2 https://youtu.be/0ACD1tD5OUkhttps://youtu.be/9yaeYPQVN1QGFM Podcast Network: Adriana Evans Interview (2011)https://open.spotify.com/episode/5jUxyG0QSFybkYRGjQuS2eFacebook: Adriana Evans at the SF Jazz Center (circa 2017-One of her latest known taped live performances) https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1429905660386329Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-vault-classic-music-reviews-podcast/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

“Our word isn't racism. It's relationship.” Those are the words of Lynne Jackson, the great great grand-daughter of Dred Scott. Lynne joins the Gloria Purvis Podcast to discuss the Dred Scott decision and its ripple effects today.  In 1852, Dred sued the state of Missouri for his freedom, invoking the law “once free always free” after living in the free state of Illinois. Ultimately, his case was denied by Chief Justice Roger Taney, who ruled by the changing political tide and pervading racism of the time. Lynne Jackson founded the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation to commemorate her ancestor's story, to continue education around racial justice, and to reconcile the descendants of formerly enslaved people with the descendants of slave-owners.   Jackson herself was able to meet the descendants of Roger Taney. And together they have spoken before colleges and legislatures, testifying to the impact of Scott's historical case as it altered the course of U.S. history and continues to ring through the generations.  “I was just grateful that we had come to a point in our country where we could have of these two families speak together and know each other and respect each other,” says Jaconson, “And have a moment where we could say we aren't our ancestors and we want to see a better day for all of our children in our country.” In addition to modeling racial reconciliation between families today, The Dred Scott Heritage Foundation raised $250,000 to commission the only statue of Dred Scott and his wife Harriet, which stand outside the Old Courthouse in St. Louis, Missouri.    There still is no postage stamp for Dred Scott. The Foundation started a Dred Scott Stamp Campaign to solicit required petitions and you can help by going to their website, www.dredscottlives.org and checking out the campaign.   Lynne Jackson is available for speaking engagements and can be reached through the website at info@thedredscottfoundation.org or 314-532-5613. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

There have many heroes in the struggle for equity and civil rights. Few had the longevity of Nathan B. Young.  In his 98 years, he was a judge, as well as being a co-founder of the St. Louis American Newspaper, and a painter, among many other accomplishments. Just press play to hear the whole story. ------  Click on search links to explore episodes with related content: Cicely Hunter, Black History, Journalism, Legal Matters, Civil Rights, People of Note, ------    Podcast Transcript: I'm Cicely Hunter, Public Historian from the Missouri Historical Society, and here's history, on eighty-eight-one, KDHX. ------ Nathan B. Young, a prominent African American judge in St. Louis, lived to be 98, passing away in 1993. It's amazing to think about what he experienced over those years, things like the Harlem Renaissance, the Great Depression, the civil rights movement, and the desegregation busing era. His life was interesting from the very beginning. Born in Tuskegee, Alabama in 1894, he lived next door to Booker T. Washington. ——— Judge Young graduated with his bachelor's degree from Florida A&M and a law degree from Yale University Law School in 1918. As a young attorney in Birmingham, Judge Young was targeted and threatened by the Ku Klux Klan due to his involvement with the local National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). Judge Young decided to migrate north with his wife, Mamie, and practiced law in St. Louis. He described the city as an “oasis compared to Birmingham, Alabama, at the time in 1924.” ——— A few years later he co-founded the St. Louis American, an African American weekly newspaper, which was soon being circulated to over 2,000 readers. Young contributed an editorial in every single issue for over forty years. One of his first articles focused on the work of A. Philip Randolph, a labor unionist and civil rights advocate, who Young described as an “unsung hero.” Randolph experienced many challenges fighting “to get recognition as a regular labor organization from the Pullman Company which had set up its own porters' union.” ——— Young enjoyed researching local Black history and developed an expertise, even writing a history of African Americans in St. Louis in 1937. When the civil rights movement was discussed, Judge Young concluded that St. Louis was important to the civil rights movement as a city with a strong Black activism presence and there were several cases that received national attention like Dred and Harriet Scott's freedom suit, Shelley v Kraemer and Gaines v Canada. ——— Judge Young was named the first African American municipal judge for City Court #2 in St. Louis by Mayor Alfonso Cervantes in December of 1965. He would retire as judge in 1972 but continued to influence the community. In honor of Black history month, let's recognize local African Americans like Judge Nathan B. Young Jr. who shared Black history with his community and now contributes to the legacy of our city. ——— Here's history is a joint production of the Missouri Historical Society and KDHX. I'm Cicely Hunter and this is eighty-eight-one, KDHX, St. Louis.

In this episode, Zimmorah and Soña take a blast into the past to discuss black performers who have shaped drag into the art form it is today. They discuss performers such as Joan Jett Blakk, Tommie Ross, Dred, and more! --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/whatthedrag/support

On April 6th 1846 the “Dred Scott Case” first went to trial in St. Louis, Missouri's Old Court House. The case involved an enslaved couple, Dred and Harriet Scott, who filed suit against their owner to gain their freedom. They did this based on the fact that they had once lived in “free territory” and should therefore have been emancipated based on the doctrine of “once free, always free”, previously recognized by Missouri courts. Little did the Scott's know, that eleven years and several court cases later, the question of their freedom would be brought before the US Supreme Court and would result in the horrendous “Dred Scott Decision”. That decision would serve as a major catalyst for the turbulent events leading up to the American Civil War. In this episode of Your History Your Story, our guest is Lynne Jackson, the great, great granddaughter of Dred and Harriet Scott and the President & Founder of the Dred Scott Heritage Foundation. Lynne will be sharing the fascinating story of her courageous ancestors who persevered in their pursuit of freedom. Picture(s): Courtesy of Lynne Jackson Music: "With Loved Ones" Jay Man

Dred

In this episode of The Feeling 30-ish Podcast our host Tre Thompson speaks on some of his frustrations, and how he had to navigate them. Join in on this episode entitled "Vell Muddasik Dred!"

The cast has a nice conversation with Issy and Paisley about being otherkin. Eventually, a shiny toy leads us to distractions. Relax and enjoy the discussion.

Having already secured a dedicated following, and opening for notable acts such as Devin the Dude, the Cataracts, the Game, People Under the Stairs and Freddie Gibbs. Dred Scott is hardly a newcomer to The bay areas hip hop scene. And, with his refreshing, revivalist approach to purely analog live rap, it's little wonder how Dred and “the Band” (guitarist Andrew Ramos, drummer Kyle Venezuela, bassist Elijah Kusel saxophonist Josh Ramos) have turned so many heads. Scott's flow is fine-tuned and consistent with a lyrical approach more akin to the recent trend of west coast rap like Curren$y and Kendrick Lamar's Black Hippy crew, than to the gangsta rappers of decades past. With the solid soul/rock grooves of his skilled accompanying band behind him, the result is some infectious hip-hop that'd start you off with a seriously smooth party.

Happy New Year! As we enter into 2021 Danny Donnelly welcomes our special guest Lee Smith aka Dead Dred / Dred Bass / Asend & Ultravibe / Soundstation / Basic Movements / who recorded for labels Moving Shadow, Back 2 Basics and of course Suburban Base. An artist that came out with some iconic basslines imitated to this day! Lee - Dead Dred is not known for interviews so we have one of the only rare and exclusive interviews with him as he details insight on the evolution of the scene. There's a lot of unknown facts and stories told in this podcast! They both listen to some classic music that has been important and influential in the life of our special guest Dead Dred! You don't want to miss this! Start your 2021 off with a bang and take a listen to The Bass Impact Podcast presented by Suburban Base Records!This podcast is a part of the Pantheon Podcast Network.

Happy New Year! As we enter into 2021 Danny Donnelly welcomes our special guest Lee Smith aka Dead Dred / Dred Bass / Asend & Ultravibe / Soundstation / Basic Movements / who recorded for labels Moving Shadow, Back 2 Basics and of course Suburban Base. An artist that came out with some iconic basslines imitated to this day! Lee - Dead Dred is not known for interviews so we have one of the only rare and exclusive interviews with him as he details insight on the evolution of the scene. There's a lot of unknown facts and stories told in this podcast! They both listen to some classic music that has been important and influential in the life of our special guest Dead Dred! You don't want to miss this! Start your 2021 off with a bang and take a listen to The Bass Impact Podcast presented by Suburban Base Records! This podcast is a part of the Pantheon Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

2:00 supernatural update7:30 The boys final trailer11:27 Judge Dredd17:38 The Umbrella Academy season 2 first look 23:26 Mulan34:10 Disney fox properties39:10 alien and predator marvel

Should you be able to say and do whatever you want onlinet;) These quarters (now restored) at Fort Snelling in Minnesota are believed to have been occupied by Dred and Harriet Scott between roughly 1836–1840. (McGhiever/Wikimedia Commons) Special thanks to Kate Taney Billingsley, whose play, A Man of His Time, inspired the story. Additional music for this episode by Gyan Riley. Thanks to Soren Shade for production help. Leadership support for More Perfect is provided by The Joyce Foundation. Additional funding is provided by The Charles Eva"https://www.oyez.org/cases/1968/492">Brandenburg v. Ohio The key links: ProPublica's report on Facebook's censorship policies   Special thanks to Elaine Chen, Jennifer Keeney Sendrow, and the entire Greene Space team. Additional engineering for this episode by Chase Culpon, Louis Mitchell, and Alex Overington. Leadership support for More Perfect is provided by The Joyce Foundation. Additional funding is provided by The Charles Evans Hughes Memorial Foundation.  Watch the event below: